User talk:Citicat/Archive 1

First Entry
why page is being deleted yaar. I havent wrote any wrong information. Someone makes links in my page and after that this massage arrive. This article has created for long time. What is this yaar explain me???????? this problem occurs with me many time. an article was also deleted. as wikipedia is encyclopedia and it must contain encyclopedia of every thing and i am putting encyclopedia of mohali and chandigarh but i cant create article easily as new bata new massage appears on articles please sort my problem yaar??

Just a note
Hey, just thought I'd poke you about blanking your talk page - usually it's preferable to archive your talk page rather than blank it, as blanking might be seen as an attempt to hide messages or mislead users. I don't think that's your intention, but I would suggest keeping messages you remove from your talk page in an archive. Happy editing! — Keakealani · ? · ! · @  04:27, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

Please stop deleting my stuff they are real people he is a real paperboy I am not lieing. Why would i waste my time vandelising I think its just rude to delet my work.

YouTube
External links should not be made to sites that are violating copyrights. In the case of YouTube, that means videos uploaded by people who don't have permission to use that footage (and it's usually obvious when that's the case). There's some discussion about all this going on at External links/YouTube. &mdash;tregoweth (talk) 06:42, 14 January 2007 (UTC)

Nice cats
Are your cats from the same litter? Or do they just look alike? How do you tell them apart? Will (Talk - contribs) 21:06, 28 January 2007 (UTC)

What is going on?
You asked a question on my talk page, it is a good question. I don't know what is going on with the "Foundation". It is a small elite group of people who have put themselves in charge of everything based upon them being the first few hundred people here or something; and most of the decisions they made are done in secret without any consultation (sometimes they think they have consulted with people but this is not true IMHO because they do not use the facilities to give people notice, the bylaws say that notices have to be sent to everyone via email (it has said that since 2003) and as far as I know no one has ever been given an email notice of any change, election, anything. I think most of the decisions around here were made without any proper notice to us "members". They (the powers that be) have almost totally lost sight of the fact that this was supposed to be a collaborative venture, and that we are all supposed to have a more or less equal voice within the parameters of the goal of creating a free and open encyclopedia which also guaranteed us certain basic rights, the right to vote for representation, the right to bring grievances to the Board (that right was also taken away on Dec. 11, 2006), really, a right to participate and make a difference. No doubt this is due to the rush of money coming at the Foundation resulting from the success (high Alexa ranking) of the venture and the fact that Jimbo and his friends were courted by one of Florida's largest "corporate" law firms (that has pretty much taken over all the previous pro bono legal work that I and other lawyers did for the Foundation and is also being paid by Jimbo's commercial company). As they say, "Absolute power corrupts absolutely". I am an advocate for openness and transparency, that is obviously why their Boss started ignoring me because my openness and inquiring nature scared him; he is afraid to loose control of the little empire he thinks he is creating (even though he never had control). If you ask me it is a mess (but there are other people who say it is the best thing since sliced bread, but they are in the "good graces" of one of the founders (I am apparently now on his shit list even though he told me I was his "friend" because of the help I gave Wikimedia that is now allowing him to fly all over the world! Ha! With friends like that who needs enemies! He came to New York this last week and didn't bother to tell his "friend" that he was in town because three weeks ago he wrote me and told me he was too busy to write to me for a few days and then I never heard from him again)). Word to the newbies, don't criticize anyone around here because if you do they will try and shoot you down, it is a whole new world of "internet politics". This is not the Wikipedia I first became involved with in 2003; it is just another big corporation with people who are involved in corporate politics, the dream of collaborative culture has now become a nightmare of people who are all out for themselves and care nothing about other volunteers; really we are like sweatshop employees, if we are nice and bend over at the right time our master gives us a few extra scraps. Don't believe me though, find out the truth for yourself, maybe your truth will be different than mine. Alex756 14:52, 3 February 2007 (UTC)

Orphaned fair use image (Image:Artielangebeerleague.jpg)
Thanks for uploading Image:Artielangebeerleague.jpg. 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 under fair use (see our fair use policy).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' 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 "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any fair use images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. This is an automated message from BJBot 23:30, 3 February 2007 (UTC)

Thank you re:Fetus
Thank you for commenting on fetus. I felt alone in the content dispute and was glad to see someone who also had issues with the recent edits. I believe I have gotten to stressed out over this article and am going to try and remove myself from the debate, but wanted to thank you for your contribution to the talk page.-Andrew c 22:54, 7 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Your observation at Talk:Fetus was, in fact, spot on — there is a discernable pattern to Ferrylodge's edits, which have included pushing to have Stillbirth redefined to include miscarriages beginning at 8 weeks, pushing to have Late-term abortion redefined to include anything after two months (citing his own op-ed piece), and pushing to have public opinion figures of disapproval of second trimester abortion on Abortion, Roe v. Wade, and Abortion in the United States. -Severa (!!!) 03:27, 10 February 2007 (UTC)


 * Nice research by the way. Now let's hope that we can achieve a consensus to get it included in the article. SheffieldSteel 02:01, 8 March 2007 (UTC)

Barnstar!

 * Thanks for the vandal fighting. It helps Wikipedia a lot. alphachimp  02:41, 8 February 2007 (UTC)

Kakadu National Park
Would you please explain why you always roll it back to the last broken version. I collected all Government information we got and try to make it as goog as possible and it doesn't help if you destroy everything again. Please contact me if you have any questions before you do it again. I am sure we can work it out. Thanks. Andrea

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. Your contributions make Wikipedia better -- thanks for helping.

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please tell me on SuggestBot's talk page. Thanks from ForteTuba, SuggestBot's caretaker.

P.S. You received these suggestions because your name was listed on the SuggestBot request page. If this was in error, sorry about the confusion. -- SuggestBot 17:13, 16 February 2007 (UTC)

Welcome to WikiProject Baseball
Hi, and welcome to the Baseball Wikiproject! We are a group of editors who love the sport of baseball and work to improve Wikipedia's coverage of this sport.

There are a variety of interesting things to do within the project; you're free to participate however much—or little—you like:


 * Starting some new articles? Please add Baseball-WikiProject to the talk page of the article.
 * Looking for something to help with? Please see our article to do list or project to do list. You may also be interested in joining one of our task forces, we have task forces for baseball players, Old-time Base Ball, and Little League.

If you have any ideas you would like to share or if there is any way your fellow baseball editors can help you, please feel free to ask on the project talk page. --Borgardetalk 00:38, 6 March 2007 (UTC)

Fetus image
You came to Talk:fetus during a RfC on the image. I followed the advice of a number of editors and I have created Image:Image-Lifesize8weekfetus-edit.JPG to include a more neutral scale and remove the controversial hand. Again, this isn't a real fetus, but would you support my edit until an even better image comes along? For reference, here is the disputed image. If interested, please reply at Talk:Fetus. Thanks for your consideration.-Andrew c 00:04, 9 March 2007 (UTC)

Atheism
I find the fact that you put the belief of a god as being a silly as being trivial at best. I'm an atheist myself but take to heart the Hindu belief in equality of religion(uh oh, I agree with a religion!). Mocking Christianity, Islam, etc by showing such disrespect to their belief structure is a fruitless effort and makes you no better then extremists in those religions. It's people like you who are preventing atheism to be taken seriously amongst belief systems of the world. It almost sounds like you're using it as an excuse to attack faults in religion. Its really sad, and you should be above that. For shame. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 142.68.98.210 (talk) 03:18, 13 March 2007 (UTC).
 * Since you don't have an account, I'll post a reply here in case you decide to look again. The userbox is meant to reflect this view. For some reason, if you call yourself an atheist, people don't think you're serious, instead you're just anti-organized religion. I don't think I'm mocking anyone by expressing my views, but if anyone is offended, well, they probably wouldn't hesitate to offend me. I don't know your agenda, but if I didn't assume good faith, I'd probably think you were trying to get back at me for reverting your edits. Citicat 13:25, 13 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Nah, theres a lot more other things that would of been easier to attack on your page in order for me to "get back" at you(not to mention its not that difficult to organize a raid). You call the whole belief system of an entire religion(s) silly, of course you're mocking someone. I don't like to be patronized for my beliefs or disbeliefs, which ever you prefer, and I like to return that. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 142.68.105.133 (talk) 19:44, 14 March 2007 (UTC).

Smile!


Here's some Penguins for you! Penguins somehow in their own strange way promote WikiLove and hopefully these Penguins have made your day seem even better. Spread the WikiLove by giving something friendly to someone else, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Make your own message to spread WikiLove to others! Happy editing!  Crested Penguin 05:53, 19 March 2007 (UTC)

Easy with those reversions
Hello Citicat. -- Like others, I greatly appreciate your commitment to reverting vandalism, but please be careful that you really hit what you are aiming at. Earlier today, you visited the Shaquanda Cotton page to revert vandalism. The first time you thought you were reverting to the last version by Wareh, but actually you reverted to the version after Wareh's edit and left the vandalism intact. The second time, 76.190.70.167 had madre were a string of vandal edits. You reverted the final edit, but not the several before it, leaving some of the junk in place and increasing the likelihood that it would be overlooked by subsequent editors. Please keep up the battle against vandalism, but please be careful too. Thanks. --Evb-wiki 18:51, 28 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Unfortunately, that's one of the limitations of the Lupin tool, but you can revert so many vandalisms this way that a very rare unfinished job like this one is a reasonable price. Citicat 21:54, 28 March 2007 (UTC)

CSD tagging of Moho
You recently tagged Moho for speedy deletion under WP:CSD. Leaving aside from the fact that A7 does not apply to neologisms, please check the page history of articles before nominating them for speedy deletion. Moho was up until recently a perfectly normal disambiguation when it was replaced with its most recent version. I have reverted to the old version and removed the CSD tag. &mdash;dgies tc 06:34, 11 April 2007 (UTC)

Philip Goad
third party references added, please check and remove the box if you're satisfied. If not, leave me a note on my talk page. Thanks.Eyedubya 05:41, 30 April 2007 (UTC)

You wrote: Hiya. My question is whether Mr. Goad satisfies the primary wiki criterion: "A topic is notable if it has received significant coverage in multiple reliable secondary sources that are independent of the subject." or other criteria of WP:NN. I want to make it clear to you that I'm not saying Mr. Goad is not notable, just that there may be a question. His position at the University of Melbourne probably doesn't qualify. I'm less sure of his position at the Royal Institute. Anyway, I'm have no intention of nominating this article for deletion. Hopefully the issue will be resolved one way or the other by someone else. If you can find any news articles about the individual, it would clarify the issue greatly. Thanks. Citi Cat  01:38, 1 May 2007 (UTC)


 * If profiles on Goad by an internationally renowned publisher (MUP) and Australia's national public broadcaster (ABC) are un-reliable sources, please clarify what 'reliable secondary sources' you are seeking.Thanks Eyedubya 13:07, 1 May 2007 (UTC)


 * I fear I may be being obtuse, and if so, I apologize. The MUP article seems to be a piece written by Mr. Goad, not about him. And the ABC page seems to be a TV show he hosted. Of course, if he has been a TV host, that could be something notable worth putting in the article. Again, the reason for the tag is to have the subject's notability more clearly stated in the article. If you want, I'll take the tag down, but the article as written may not satisfy notability, and someone else may list it at wp:afd. All I'm suggesting is that you might want to clarify the subject's accomplishments in the article. Then again, you may not. Citi Cat  13:28, 1 May 2007 (UTC)


 * Both of us maybe suffering from obtuseness, but that's not necessarily the problem. You may be correct about the provenance of the MUP entry, but it could also have been his co-author. It may also have been the blurb writer at MUP. FYI, MUP is a serious, international publisher, and they have a high reputation to maintain. MUP do not engage in the kind of author-funded publishing by individuals that WP is concerned about. I've added some further accomplishments of Goad's to the article - a selection of his publications (all books) and awards. But leave the box there for a while, hopefully someone who has access to more information about him will be stirred to add it to the article. Eyedubya 14:33, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

Basil Catterns
Frankly I cannot see how someone living in the US is qualified to draw any conclusions about the notability or otherwise of a person like Catterns who is of admittedly of regional significance, but at least he did something worthwhile unlike the 100s of fat-arsed baseball players who are given disk space here.

Catterns is notable for a number of reasons most of which are at least alluded to the article. For your information in Australia obits in the paper are not paid for, they are published after the usual editorial review. I am about to revert your silly and ill considered tag. If you think the article is not in good faith or the subject lacks merit RfD it. Albatross2147 04:36, 21 April 2007 (UTC)
 * I'm sorry you are upset by the tag. The point is that your article does not assert what the individual's notability is. I specifically did not mark it for deletion, but the tag states "If you are familiar with the subject matter, please expand the article to establish its notability". I have no desire to have an edit war and will not further edit the article. I feel however it is likely that someone will mark it for deletion if it is not expanded. Cheers. Citi Cat  05:01, 21 April 2007 (UTC)
 * If I didn't see from yr contribs that you generally edit in good faith I would suspect that you are being deliberately obtuse. The man won an MC the third level gallantry award in the Commonwealth as well as starting a notable publication etc. A third level gallantry award seems to be sufficient to meet "notability"  crieria in lots of other articles. BTW you tagged the article about 5 mins after it was posted - you have to give it time to rise. Albatross2147 05:09, 21 April 2007 (UTC)

Twinkle
Thanks for your message and offer of help. I'm still testing what's going on with Twinkle and your monobook.js might help with that. The problem is that I can't tell if Twinkle is working, since there's no reference to what it's supposed to look like! I do get some extra tabs and links on some pages, so it's at least partially working, but not consistently, and I don't know if that's on purpose or a problem with the script or script/browser interaction. Best, --MCB 01:02, 26 April 2007 (UTC)

My Sig
Many thanks -- I wondered what was up with that! DagnyB 03:26, 28 April 2007 (UTC)

Thanks!
Thanks for catching the vandalism on my talk page! Darry2385 02:43, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

Back on the Main Article
Can you revert my top edit? I made a bad edit, and my browser is having trouble. --əˈnongahy ♫Look What I've Done!♫ 00:22, 31 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Thanks! --əˈnongahy ♫Look What I've Done!♫ 00:25, 31 May 2007 (UTC)

Wikipedia New York Meet-Up
Howdy! Please come to the First Annual New York Wikipedian Central Park Picnic. R.S.V.P. @ Meetup/NYC --David Shankbone 22:22, 12 June 2007 (UTC)

Porter Ridge High School
Hey there. Thanks for the revert/report on that article. I've requested oversight on a number of revisions. Think you know why ... Just letting you know. Thanks - A l is o n  ☺ 04:23, 14 June 2007 (UTC)
 * ✅ :) - A l is o n  ☺ 05:01, 14 June 2007 (UTC)

DeadBot
I've had a lot of work on lately, so I haven't been runningg it. Hopefully, i'll have it set up auto this weekend. Also, please make your sig clickable, I had to manually type your user name in. Matt/TheFearow (Talk) (Contribs) (Bot) 07:14, 29 June 2007 (UTC)

Alex Porteau Article
The article has recently come up for deletion and you voted for its deletion. I have since re-written the article and think that the article is now good enough to remain on Wikipedia. If you could have a look at the article and re-consider your vote it would be much appreciated. A-Dust 11:13, 2 July 2007 (UTC)

Archive of earlier discussions, through July 2nd, 2007

RfA result
I am pleased to let you know that, consensus reached, you are now an Administrator. You should find the following forums useful:
 * Administrators' reading list
 * Administrators' how-to guide
 * Administrators' Noticeboard
 * Administrators' Noticeboard for Incidents
 * Administrators' Noticeboard for Three-revert rule violations

Congratulations on your promotion and the best of luck with your new charge! Redux 12:24, 7 July 2007 (UTC)


 * Congratulations on your successful RfA! Happy moppin',  An as  talk? 12:56, 7 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Yea, I wish you luck on your new job too! Politics rule 13:57, 7 July 2007 (UTC)

A Question about your signature
I've always wondered, how do u make one of the colored signatures?

re: RfA
Thanks for clarifying your vote on that AfD. I still don't agree with it, but that's okay :) Congrats on your RfA passing! --Spike Wilbury ♫  talk  02:19, 9 July 2007 (UTC)

May 26
Bah, my revert didn't catch all the vandalism, and yours added some back. Manually fixing it! :) -Superbeecat 23:31, 9 July 2007 (UTC) You beat me to it. Cheers! -Superbeecat 23:33, 9 July 2007 (UTC)

Stellenrust deletion
Dear Citicat.

I would like to know why the site that I was busy was deleted as blatant advertising. Stellenrust is one of the oldest wine estates in souht africa. I was trying to give information on the farm.

Please advice

Thanks
Thank you for blocking User:68.40.158.237 Angel Of  Sadness  17:57, 11 July 2007 (UTC)

DRV
An editor has asked for a deletion review of Greenhill & Company. Since you closed the deletion discussion for this article or speedy-deleted it, you might want to participate in the deletion review. --W.marsh 01:45, 16 July 2007 (UTC)

Block to Soxrock
I don't know if it's my place to comment on the situation, but if I may give my input, I would like to say that Soxrock is a very contributive user. He spends countless hours imrpoving near hundreds of articles on a daily basis. He has never had a problem like this in the past. And if there is one reason why I think this block is unfair, it's because he was never ever warned of any 3RR violation. Nobody ever warned him that he was close to violating that rule, yet he was still reported. I don't think somebody should be reported and blocked for something if they were never cautioned about it. I remain impartial on the dispute, itself, but it's really unfair to blcok somebody who was never even warned about it. If he were warned, he maybe would've stopped. But you can't block him if he doesn't know he's about to violate a rule. I'm not sure if there's anything that can be done about this now, but I really hope he can be unblocked. He doesn't deserve it under these circumstances. Ksy92003 (talk)  17:10, 18 July 2007 (UTC)

I quote Soxrock, on my talk page earlier today in reference to 3RR: "Jesus christ, I know about that." Why should someone that knows about policy and is responsible for their actions need to be warned? ► Chris Nelson  17:17, 18 July 2007 (UTC)
 * You might be interested in reading the deletion review on this page. I believe 24 hours is appropriate for the situation.  Citi Cat   ♫ 17:29, 18 July 2007 (UTC)


 * But still, I don't think it's entirely fair that he be blocked without making any reverts after the time another user warned him. Ksy92003  (talk)  17:42, 18 July 2007 (UTC)


 * The major hole in that, Chris nelson, is that although he admitted to knowing about it, you didn't warn him about WP:3RR until 15:30, which was more than 9 minutes after his last revert. He didn't make any more reverts after he was warned.  Ksy92003  (talk)  17:31, 18 July 2007 (UTC)


 * Well I hope your happy that I got two strikes called against me when I didn't do anything after the first. 24 hours of work that could've been added here are now going to be harder to add. Thanks a whole lot Soxrock 16:59, 19 July 2007 (UTC)

Your destruction of my work
I reported User:TharkunColl to AIAV not just because of his violation of the 3RR rule but his general edit history shows persistent vandalism. I have not seen a user with more warnings on their talk page and something must be done instead of the short 24 hour blocks he receives occasionally. I would appreciate that you didn't just delete my nomination as it did also have backing from another more experienced user. XAndreWx 19:12, 18 July 2007 (UTC)
 * I highly suggest you read Guide to administrator intervention against vandalism before using AIV. This user may well have been incorrect in his actions, but you did not follow policy in attempting to correct the problem.  Citi Cat   ♫ 19:16, 18 July 2007 (UTC)


 * Ah, just to note: I didn't back the nomination for vandalism review; I voiced an opinion that User:TharkunColl is generally disruptive and very difficult to work with. There may well be other avenues via which he can be dealt with; I'm just not sure what is appropriate. --G2bambino 19:19, 18 July 2007 (UTC)

Nonsense Tag
Sorry, I obviously copied the wrong article from AWB, it must have gone to the next without me realising. My bad :) Matt/TheFearow (Talk) (Contribs) (Bot) 06:33, 20 July 2007 (UTC)

Why my page has been deleted
can you please give me the reasin that wahy the page was deleted Harpreet Singh (carrom player). You must inform me once before doing that....user:hpt_lucky
 * This page was speedily removed by an administrator because it had been previously deleted as the result of a deletion discussion (Articles for deletion/Amarpreet Singh Johal). If you disagree with this decision, please see Deletion review for how to have further discussion on the matter.  Citi Cat  <sup style="color:#000000;"> ♫ 18:40, 21 July 2007 (UTC)

Harpreet Singh(carrom player) & Amarpreet
THe above said article is about the champ of punjab state carrom association. It was deleted as i copied the same material to another article named amarpreet singh johal as he is also sub junior champ and champ of punjab state. Punjab state carrom association is a sports association of State Punjab it's not a small state. It comes under all india carrom federation and i also have created an article for it buit its under construction. I dont know wat happen suddenly o wikipedia team. I also have create dmany artcils about other carrom players from the state punjab. You have deleted every one saying it notable. But Harpreet Singh and Amarpreet articles are not notable ones they include acheivements. Punjab State Carrom Association is a website and that artcle called punjab state carrom association was ceated by webmaster my freind Harpreet. he is webmasetr of that site which give me previleges to drop articles from his site. If you want written permission from him then i will tell him to do that.

You can also see that the guys who have edited the punjab state carrom association page used "" sign in every name tahts why i have create dthe articles. Well i am a bit confused man. I want u to tell me if someone have changed my pages. Enjoy life Rabb Rakha.......user:hpt_lucky

Thank you
Thank you for your support at my recent Requests for adminship/Angus Lepper RfA, which failed, with no consensus to promote me. However, I appreciate the concerns raised during the course of the discussion (most notably, a lack of experience, particularly in admin-heavy areas such as XfDs and policy discussions) and will attempt to address these before possibly standing again in several months time. Angus Lepper(T, C, D) 16:04, 28 July 2007 (UTC)

User:68.230.102.217
Yeah, I think they're on the level. I ended up going out before I got your message, but I will unblock now. Of course, you would have been free to unblock them yourself sometime after it became apparent I was offline, but thanks for contacting me. Natalie 14:18, 29 July 2007 (UTC)

Image Makers Asia
Hi, I am new on wikipedia and I've noticed you were the first to speedy the article Image Makers Asia when it was first created. I've worked with a few admins in the sandbox on re-creating the article and have managed to come up with (in my opinion) a quite decent article to post on the main space. I know several others have said it is still lacking notability, but I have done my best with research, (perhaps I could do some more extra research on citations or secondary sources), but if you could take a look and tell me if it is already good enough to be posted? Thank you. Charineeimagebkk 03:55, 3 August 2007 (UTC)

Jacob's Ladder
I don't really car that you revert back my edits. I offer them with only good faith...

However, any chance you could answer the question I pose at the end of the discussion, apropos of the protagonist having a son factually? 67.87.92.56 22:43, 3 August 2007 (UTC)

Thanks
Thanks for the format fix on the afd for Longo. I'm still getting my stripes in AfD closure. the_undertow talk  06:28, 7 August 2007 (UTC)

Articles for deletion/Wandlore (Harry Potter)
Nice work with the closure. However, transwikied articles are not deleted, but redirected, per the GFDL. The best way to handle this is to restore the article, redirect it to the ideal place, and protect the redirect; this way, the edit history is available for users should they want to transwiki/merge. &mdash; Deckiller 04:30, 12 August 2007 (UTC)


 * Do you mean a soft redirect? I didn't think you can redirect to a wikia article.  Citi Cat  <sup style="color:#000000;"> ♫ 14:33, 12 August 2007 (UTC)


 * Sorry, I didn't make myself clear (it was late). I meant a redirect to Magic (Harry Potter), where Wandlore is mentioned on Wikipedia. An external link on Magic (Harry Potter) can lead to the Wikia article on Wandlore. The talkpage of the Wandlore article at Wikia would then link to the edit history of Wandlore (Harry Potter). &mdash; Deckiller 14:35, 12 August 2007 (UTC)
 * I took care of the external link; all that remains is to restore the history and redirect to Magic (Harry Potter). &mdash; Deckiller 14:44, 12 August 2007 (UTC)

No problem; it looks like we're all set. &mdash; Deckiller 15:41, 12 August 2007 (UTC)

Re: Blanking Talk Page
Yes i do have a reason. First of all, i wasn't deleting other people comments, mine was the only one. the reason i deleted that one heading was because there is a genre debate, so i started a survey, but another user brought it to my attention that polls arent suitable, so i felt i should remove it. Dissectional 17:39, 13 August 2007 (UTC)

User:Tecmobowl
He was banned by the community decision, but someone placed the indefblockuser instead of the banned tag. Thanks Jaranda wat's sup 18:24, 14 August 2007 (UTC)
 * What is the practical difference between an indefinite block and a ban? Baseball Bugs 22:58, 14 August 2007 (UTC)
 * OK, I think I get it... a ban is a consensus decision that would require additional discussion and new consensus to revoke; a block of any kind is a unilateral decision by an admin that can be overridden by another admin. Have I got it right? Baseball Bugs 01:52, 15 August 2007 (UTC)

Pabitra Kumar Sen
Declined to speedy delete, as full professor at a university is an assertion of notability, though it certainly doesnt prove it.DGG (talk) 17:24, 15 August 2007 (UTC)

User:69.135.177.104 and Northville High School
It seems that that User:69.135.177.104 has returned to adding the unsourced allegations to Northville High School article. Over the last 24 hours, he has restored the allegations three times. That said, he did wait six days after the semi-protect was lifted. I feel that this person is going to continue to restore the allegations regardless of Wikipedia policy so I think that the article should be semi-protected again for at least a month. Coaster1983 04:01, 16 August 2007 (UTC)

Talk:Torrie Wilson
We already handled it. There is no need for blocking. Art 281 15:26, 16 August 2007 (UTC)

Opus (magazine)
you deleted my work without any discussion whatsoever, apparently because the last time someone created this article they didnt do enough work on it. you know what? fuck wikipedia. alexis+kate=? 07:54, 18 August 2007 (UTC)
 * I know you're upset, but the reason it was deleted was that under Criteria for speedy deletion, an article that has been deleted previously after an Article For Deletion Process (see here) recently is subject to being immediately (speedily) deleted. To attempt to have the article created it is likely you would need a Deletion Review. I'm aware this is probably not going to make you any happier, but I did want you to know that these things go by established process, not by my (or anyone else's) feelings about the article.  Citi Cat  <sup style="color:#000000;"> ♫ 12:08, 18 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Sorry about Kate's outburst above. Guess we still have a bit to learn about the way this thing works. I do think Blitz (magazine) should be deleted, but discussion seems to be skewed by the presence of one or more people who work for the organisation that publishes it. alexis+kate=? 13:08, 3 September 2007 (UTC)

Scottish Air News
Citi,

I think that the article should rather go onto User talk:Jim Fulton's space, since he created it. I am troubled, though, that the page was deleted as the sole reason given was the copy/paste issue which was not only never demonstrated, but in point of fact the opposite was demonstrated. Per the arguments in favor of deletion, each was systematically refuted. Why, then, would the page be deleted if the reasons for deletion were erroneous?

I don't have a personal connection to the article; my "beef" if one would accuse me of having one would be the deletion of an article for reasons that were clearly untrue. It's a mob mentality, and I'm not meaning to accuse you of doing it, but rather people in the voting process that, when shown their arguments to be baseless would still insist. Am I missing something here? Is there no process for this?

It just seems that, though Wikipedia has these protections such as the "hangon" and "construction" tags, they are ignored. Seems like a process issue somewhere, and I'd just like to have it addressed for Wiki as a whole and to avoid running into it again in the future.

The only other thing mentioned was the original nominator who, as the last post of the discussion, referred to the article's notability. Researching recent deletions that were overturned (actually, recent deletions and only one that was overturned), I found this article on Junkyard Jane. This article has no references section and only one external link. I feel that, notwithstanding WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS, this article shows a equal (or less) level of notability, but I agree that it ought be there. The Scottish Air News article is in the same boat, EXCEPT that it has references and external links... that would indicate more notability. Before I would think, though, to ask for a deletion review, I would want your thoughts on it (as someone more experienced in deletion policies and practices).

I appreciate your offer to put the page into a userspace; I really do. I fel that shows an understanding of people and intents (however unfulfilled sometimes due to time constraints) that few on Wiki have shown, and I applaud you for that understanding-ness. Thank you very much for that.

Again, I just want to understand how an article is deleted for reasons shown to be false (in this case copy/paste) and in general understand the process, the issues, and the people for continued excellence in Wiki.

Thank you for your time and attention,

VigilancePrime 03:10, 20 August 2007 (UTC)


 * Thank you. I understand. Maybe in the future the article will be more Wiki-fiable! :-)
 * VigilancePrime 04:05, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

Merge and redirect AfDs
Hi Citicat,

I noticed that you closed Articles for deletion/Southernmost point in the continental United States as merge and redirect, but you deleted Southernmost point in the continental United States in the merge process. It's usually better to leave the history of the merged article intact, for GFDL compliance reasons (an alternative is to copy the contributor information to the talk page of the target article, but that's usually more work). I hope that you don't mind, but, on this reasoning, I restored the history of Southernmost point in the continental United States underneath your redirect and tagged it with R from merge. If people misuse the history to revert to a complete article against the AfD decision, then the redirect can be protected. — TKD::Talk 05:25, 20 August 2007 (UTC)
 * And I just protected the redirect to curtail that exact scenario. — TKD::Talk 12:50, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

Opus (Newcastle)
Hi you will recall that you deleted Opus (magazine) and seeded the page. To overcome the seed, the same editor has recreated the article but under the new name Opus (Newcastle). Though the article is longer it still has no sourced content and I see no new assertion of notability. Can you sort this, please? Bridgeplayer 03:11, 22 August 2007 (UTC)

Lay Down Sally
You closed the afd on Lay Down Sally. Normally, when an administrator closes an afd they leave a note to that effect on the article's talk page. Yes I noticed that you didn't do that in this case.

I put a note. But I have no problem with you replacing it with the official note, if you had meant to do so, and got distracted.

Cheers! Geo Swan 16:25, 25 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Normally I do, but this was such an obvious bad faith nomination, I didn't feel it even merited mentioning, and that a mention on the talk page would be feeding the vandal.  Citi Cat  <sup style="color:#000000;"> ♫ 17:12, 25 August 2007 (UTC)

per nom?
I noticed that you used "delete per nom". I made an attempt to get User:Corvus cornix to offer reasoned arguments when he or she nominated Robert Preston (military lawyer) for deletion. Frankly it was like pulling teeth.

I know WP:ATA is just a guideline. But it seems like a pretty reasonable one. And it recommends avoiding "per nom".

So, I am a bit surprised you didn't offer a reasoned argument for Silent (2007 film), or for The Signature LP.

It is not my intention to be difficult. ButI know afd is not a vote, and I thought that meant offering reasoned argument was important. Am I missing something?

Cheers! Geo Swan 16:40, 26 August 2007 (UTC)
 * The guideline against using per nom states it's not a good idea if if several people already have showed support for the nominator. However, at the start of a discussion, it can be helpful to show that the deletion motion is supported. In the Silent AFD, there was an argument that the nomination was bad faith, and my support was showing I felt the article deserved deletion regardless. Anyhoo, I'm aware of the guideline, and I generally add my own reasoning to established debates. Cheers,  Citi Cat  <sup style="color:#000000;"> ♫ 16:56, 26 August 2007 (UTC)

Bob's Discount Furniture deletion
Hello Citicat, I wanted to comment regarding the recent deletion of Bob's Discount Furniture, which you were involved with as the closing admin (Articles_for_deletion/Bob%27s_Discount_Furniture). I realize that the voting period is closed but I feel that some of the comments regarding notability may be mistaken. The subject is often discussed in secondary sources (e.g. this article, this article, and in a couple of these articles from the NY Times). I did not get a chance to vote in the debate, since I just noticed the deletion yesterday, but I would have voted 'keep'. Based on notability issues discussed above and the close 5-3 vote, I feel that the deletion of the article deserves further consideration and debate. Thanks. --GregRM 02:32, 28 August 2007 (UTC)
 * An editor has asked for a deletion review of Bob's Discount Furniture. Since you closed the deletion discussion for this article or speedy-deleted it, you might want to participate in the deletion review. --GregRM 18:10, 9 September 2007 (UTC)

DRV on Airline complaints
An editor has asked for a deletion review of Airline complaints. Since you closed the deletion discussion for this article or speedy-deleted it, you might want to participate in the deletion review. GRBerry 21:34, 30 August 2007 (UTC)

Science Fiction Hall of Fame page
Re: 16:33, 21 July 2007 Citicat (Talk | contribs) deleted "Science Fiction and Fantasy Hall of Fame" ‎ (speedily deleted- unquestionably a copyright infringement of http://www2.ku.edu/~sfcenter/SF-HOF.htm csd g12)

Please re-up that page. It is not a copyright violation because I was the original creator of that page at the Center for the Study of Science Fiction. Please contact users before immediately deleting pages, because I suspect my work was not the only victim of this. I also never got a notification until after the fact.

I suggest a new Wikipedia feature where Wikipedia emails a user when an impending deletion is coming. A simple request for a GNU FDL would have allayed your concerns.

Please advise via email (cmckit -at- gmail [dot] com), because I don't check my Wikipedia talk page daily or even weekly.


 * Please see Donating copyrighted materials for clarification of Wikipedia policy. In a nutshell, even though you created or own content on a page, you still may not post in on Wikipedia unless you are releasing it into the public domain (renouncing all copyright) or are giving non-exclusive license under the GNU Free Documentation License and explicitly state this on the original web page. It is not acceptable to say "this material can be used on Wikipedia, but not anywhere else".  Citi Cat  <sup style="color:#000000;"> ♫  02:58, 3 September 2007 (UTC)

Jasenovac concentration camp
User Votec has made in last 6 - 8 hours more of 100 changes in article (and he is not stoping). I have never heard of something like that. Is this against rules of wiki ?? Rjecina 03:16, 4 September 2007 (UTC)
 * In the end I will revert his edits... Why ? Because his edits are POV. He has been warned before because of POV edits. I will give reasons for revert on discussion page of article. Rjecina 03:34, 4 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Can you be good and delete this User:Rjecina/Editorial policy for history of east and south Europe and this User:Rjecina/Creation of Yugoslavia article from my user space ? Rjecina 03:36, 4 September 2007 (UTC)

RE: Articles for deletion/Uys family
Dear Citi, I do not know exactly how this deletion etc things work, not too user friendly if you had to ask me, but please check my comments here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Articles_for_deletion/Uys_family with regards to the subject. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Reyaan (talk • contribs) 22:29, 5 September 2007 (UTC)

Okay so no reply on my comment above, so I'll list my comment from the above link, maybe you'd answer me then...

"KEEP - What is required for verification of notability? http://www.whoswhosa.co.za/Pages/profilefull.aspx?IndID=2563 and http://www.whoswhosa.co.za/Pages/profilefull.aspx?IndID=6711, this is of the most notable of our current generation let alone those that made impact in history. The fact is that the family is noted as having played a pivotal role in history and the shaping of the society(ies) that they have found themselves. If one had to add almost notable people then the list would be endless, from senior politicians to shareholders/directors of some of the largest corporates on the African continent and Southern Hemisphere, other include the arts, academic etc etc. This all proves in fact that the family as a whole has and is playing an important role in South Africa (and other neighbouring countries) and is not focused on a single individual. Some more time has to be spent on the article to be broader based representative. On the point that Wikipedia articles are not genealogical entries, then it could also be argued that it is not a movie database or an advertising medium for corporates. This is an historical entry which has found itself onto other mediums such as military books. One of the biggest monuments in South Africa, the Voortrekker Monument, celebrates the achievements of this family and highlights them as being one of the foremost notable families. Notability as an issue has to be seen in context; are these people notable in the country described or internationally? Well the examples given clearly state that there are international and local notable people, thus that argument does not stand." —Preceding unsigned comment added by Reyaan (talk • contribs) 15:50, 1 October 2007 (UTC)

Deleting New Philanthropy Capital
Can I ask why you deleted this page? There was nothing to suggest advertising on the page, no call here, or New Philanthropy Capital is great. We worked hard to keep it factual and neutral. New Philanthropy Capital is actually a not for profit, so would not be looking to 'advertise' on wikiepedia anyway. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.69.151.20 (talk) 15:11, 10 September 2007 (UTC)
 * The article clearly was written by a person or persons with interest in the article's subject, and it was not written from a neutral point of view. Non-profit and charitable organizations are not exempt from the prohibition against putting promotional materials on Wikipedia. To quote one section "-Developing a strategy for giving- NPC’s tailored strategy service helps donors to choose an approach that will be most beneficial for all involved: the charities and the people they support, the donors and their staff or families." and it gets worse after that.  Citi Cat  <sup style="color:#000000;"> ♫ 15:52, 10 September 2007 (UTC)

Articles for deletion/Bob's Discount Furniture
When deleting this article, you left the talk page Talk:Bob's Discount Furniture. Shouldn't that be deleted too? - Jehochman Talk 16:56, 10 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Right you are.  Citi Cat  <sup style="color:#000000;"> ♫ 17:04, 10 September 2007 (UTC)

Hacker Ministry AfD
Hey -- I closed this debate right after you relisted it. I didn't realize at the time; didn't mean to step on your toes. But, I think it's better to close the debate instead of relisting: the debate was somewhat confused because of some OR based on email correspondance that has now been removed, so if the question must be raised again it should be raised fresh. Mango juice talk 19:09, 14 September 2007 (UTC)

Barneca RfA thank you spam
CitiCat, thank you for your support during my RfA, especially after the concerns that were brought up by other editors. I'll keep all of the comments in mind in the coming months, and will try again later. In the mean time, if you see me doing something stupid, please let me know. See you around. --barneca (talk) 13:10, 20 September 2007 (UTC)

RFA Thanks!
Thanks for your participation for my RFA bid and for your support.--JForget 23:16, 20 September 2007 (UTC)

Consensus
Hi Citicat, I left a rather brusque reply to a comment you left at this AfD. I struck it out, as I generally don't believe in removing comments from talk spaces. However, I wanted to apologize and assure you that there was no insult intended, I simply replied without thinking it through. :) Cheers, faithless   (speak)  03:30, 22 September 2007 (UTC)

List of progressive rock artists
Was there a discussion prior to the deletion of this article? --Scottandrewhutchins 16:45, 25 September 2007 (UTC)
 * That page was a redirect to List of progressive rock bands and musicians, which was was deleted after this discussion  Citi Cat  <sup style="color:#000000;"> ♫ 17:33, 25 September 2007 (UTC)

Sebwite's reply

 * In response to the deleted article, what I have thought of doing is writing a description of each of these individual roads in the respective town in which the majority of the road is located. If you can transfer the article to my user page, I can take it from that point on. Sebwite 14:43, 30 September 2007 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Deletion review
A big oops! For what it's worth, I might have !Vote delete at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Wikipedia:Deletion review. -- Jreferee    t / c  00:57, 4 October 2007 (UTC)
 * I hit stop (on my browser) right after I hit delete, I hadn't even realized I had clicked on the link to that page. Then I checked it a minute later, and everything seemed fine. Oh well. I'm working on restoring it now. Thanks.  Citi Cat  <sup style="color:#000000;"> ♫ 01:11, 4 October 2007 (UTC)
 * I was about to ask why deletion review was deleted, but then I realized it was the ultimate deletionist thing to do :p — M o e   ε  01:30, 4 October 2007 (UTC)

Requests for arbitration/Ferrylodge
Hello,

An Arbitration case in which you commented has been opened: Requests for arbitration/Ferrylodge. Please add any evidence you may wish the Arbitrators to consider to the evidence sub-page, Requests for arbitration/Ferrylodge/Evidence. You may also contribute to the case on the workshop sub-page, Requests for arbitration/Ferrylodge/Workshop.

On behalf of the Arbitration Committee, Newyorkbrad 16:52, 15 October 2007 (UTC)

After Midnight Project
Why was the page for After Midnight Project deleted? I was going to add the page but noticed you had previously deleted it.

Magus05 21:23, 15 October 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for the speedy response! While I tend to think they are notable enough to have a page, I will admit they don't fit into the official criteria. I'll let it pass, they'll get bigger and somebody out there will undoubtedly make the page again.

Magus05 09:04, 16 October 2007 (UTC)

AFD/Bombadil
Care to give a rationale? Will (talk) 16:40, 20 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Sure. The closure was based on the fact that no one refuted that the band met the primarily notability criteria of significant coverage in third party sources.  Citi Cat  <sup style="color:#000000;"> ♫ 16:52, 20 October 2007 (UTC)

Hey, the descision was to keep the bombadil article. We did not discuss moving the page. Will' moved it to bombadil (band), and redirected the bombadil article to the Tom Bombadil article. Can we please revert it? Jamisys 02:43, 21 October 2007 (UTC)

Kēlen
An editor has asked for a deletion review of Kēlen. Since you closed the deletion discussion for this article or speedy-deleted it, you might want to participate in the deletion review. Sai Emrys  ¿?   ✍  19:38, 20 October 2007 (UTC)

Re:3RR
wwe has not stated anything about Kristal Marshall status. when wwe does not state there status they are put on the inactive list. even on her myspace page she states that she is employed by the wwe.User:Aladdin Zane is trying to use dirtsits to say that she has been fired.dirtsits are known not to be a reliable source.Wwe always announces when there tv talent has been released.he is trying to minipulate you.SpeedyC1 01:17, 26 October 2007 (UTC)

also look at this revert by him  —Preceding unsigned comment added by SpeedyC1 (talk • contribs) 01:23, 26 October 2007 (UTC)

Bittersweet Poetry
I have temporarily restored this article's history (not sure if what I did was the most efficient way to do that), so that the community can see a (now deleted) edit that I cited in dicussion on a current WP:RFA candidacy. Once the candidacy has concluded, I'll re-delete the article. Just wanted to let you know out of courtesy, since you had deleted it and may be checking your logs for blue links (many of us do) to see what has crept back out of the ooze following deletion. Carlossuarez46 03:37, 30 October 2007 (UTC)

TruthCrusader
''This seems to me like two bad drivers meeting at a merger and crashing into each other. ''

And you would be wrong. Before you continue falling for the word of a troll, misinterpret the timing, and continue to insist on using false equivalency, consider the following:

1) I didn't "[throw] fuel on a smouldering fire": I hadn't been editing Wikipedia in a month. What drew me back was tracing the source of...

2)...someone leaving a comment on my blog, reading "fuck off, you wikipedia nazi". And hey, look where its IP address led to. Very helpful of TruthCrusader. I left a message telling him he'd been rumbled, and lo, another message shows up (though this time he thought to use an anonymizer first):


 * I know who you are....a[n] ... arrogant bitter angry fucktard whose alcoholic father raped a ... woman and had the misfortune of fathering YOU...piece of shit who uses the fact that he was taunted all his life ... to bring misery and bitterness to Wikipedia. You're the worst example of a wikipedia editor and a human being in general.


 * ...you come across as a bitter 15 year old emo kid. You will never amount to anything except a lonely old english teacher (which means you are also probably a pedophile). The best thing for you to do would be to blow your fucking brains out.

Lemme know how that double-standard troll-enabling philosophy works out for you.

3)The stuff documented publicly isn't the worst thing that TruthCrusader seems to have done, but it shouldn't be dredged up unless absolutely necessary, since the energy-suck that's already taken place is bad enough, more drama is unhelpful, and there are privacy issues involved. He's blocked, and that should be the end of it.

4) And before you continue badgering Jpgordon, I should tell you that I have been advising not just Jpgordon, but two other admins, and they don't seem to have objected so far. If you want, I can ask them to contact you directly with their opinions -- or you can just stop assuming bad faith from a long-time admin and member of ArbCom, namely Jpgordon. --Calton | Talk 14:52, 1 November 2007 (UTC)


 * If I do quit Wikipedia, it will be in disgust over people who think empowering trolls, rewarding personal harassment, and/or practicing amateur group psychology takes precedence over creating, writing, and editing an encyclopedia, or who are unable to draw gross distinctions even when a picture is painted for them. --Calton | Talk 15:35, 1 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Yup, that's probably true - I believe you need to look up the term "self-awareness". You might find it helpful. --Calton | Talk 15:43, 1 November 2007 (UTC)

Calton's departure would be one of the best things that ever happened to Wikipedia, as he appears to promote nothing but ill will and negativity. MegaMom 06:41, 4 November 2007 (UTC)


 * I agree very much with MegaMom. Gunnerdevil4 04:55, 16 November 2007 (UTC)

Williewikka
Thanks for tagging that. You may be interested in Suspected sock puppets/Wikzilla.  AK Radecki <sup style="color:#62BB32;">Speaketh  20:51, 2 November 2007 (UTC)

PROD didn't expire
You deleted Paul Morris (producer) as an expired PROD. If you look at the edit history, you'll see that on Nov 1, the PROD was removed, and multiple sources were added, then on Nov 9 that was reverted, and you deleted. 

I restored, but I thought to let you know. --AnonEMouse (squeak) 19:16, 12 November 2007 (UTC)

Reverted your close of AfD debate on Bruce Khlebnikov
It was, of course, nothing personal, but it appeared that consensus was forming around delete, per the fact that there were three delete comments (including nom), and one keep. Also, per my research, this person may well be fictitious. Mr Which??? 02:36, 22 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Hmm... the Russian Ghits change things a bit. I'm not sure exactly what to make of it now. Do these sources weigh as heavily in discussions regarding notability? They speak to his not being fictitious, but do they add to his notability? You should post them as a comment to the discussion. Mr Which??? 02:59, 22 November 2007 (UTC)
 * I have to tell you that I endorse the re-listing. I do not believe that the community had effectively spoken here - even to say "no consensus".  - Philippe &#124; Talk 05:25, 22 November 2007 (UTC)

Articles for deletion/Astrid Award
I think you might have made a poor decision in closing this. With only 4 participants, it is rarely a good idea to close a debate as "no consensus" because a few more opinions may make the consensus clear. Why not just relist it? Mango juice talk 19:14, 1 December 2007 (UTC)


 * I think my argument counters his. His argument makes a decent case that the award is considered important by some.  On the other hand, we really can't have an article with no reliable sources on this topic, as I was pointing out.  None have been brought forward, and I couldn't find any.  There are a lot of self-published things but nothing reliable that discusses the award at all that I could find.  Now, maybe you don't agree with me but I think that's a good reason to delete that DGG's argument doesn't counter.  So yeah, the debate really could end up as delete, and by relisting it we will find out.  Or I can make the point at DRV if you prefer.  Mango juice talk 06:16, 2 December 2007 (UTC)

Articles for deletion/Noelle Bush (second nomination)
Hi. It looks like you forgot to close the AfD when implementing the redirect. I've taken care of that. Sandstein 07:10, 2 December 2007 (UTC)

Delete
I'm fine with that. Work away! Hope you enjoy the larger article. Fergananim —Preceding comment was added at 19:01, 5 December 2007 (UTC)

Angelic Evasion
I completely understand why my article was deleted, I was just wondering how you would post an article on a band that has no reference sites other than it's own page. Musichatesyouall (talk) 17:54, 1 January 2008 (UTC)

Angelic Evasion
Thank you very much for responding and for your honesty. I can see where wiki is coming from with these guidelines, but I also see a lot of grey area with them. I personally think that it is rather unsavory to control the media with specific criteria, but wiki probably won't listen. The criteria is probably set in place more to control number of articles than anything anyway. Anyway I am looking forward to maybe seeing an article of this band in place in the near future hopefully! Thanks again for your time and patience (especially when you could have told me that I am a dumbass and I need to search the rules) Musichatesyouall (talk) 18:47, 1 January 2008 (UTC)

Wow, quick delete!
That was a quick delete, 1 minute after I posted the template! You are a speedy admin...congrats! <span class="plainlinks" style="font-size:95%;font-variant:small-caps;font-weight:bold;letter-spacing: 2px;"> Soxred93 | talk count bot 00:31, 19 January 2008 (UTC)

Speedy deletion of Template:User Custom lessthan edit count
A tag has been placed on Template:User Custom lessthan edit count requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section T3 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a deprecated or orphaned template. After seven days, if it is still unused and the speedy deletion tag has not been removed, the template will be deleted.

If the template is intended to be substituted, please feel free to remove the speedy deletion tag and please consider putting a note on the template's page indicating that it is substituted so as to avoid any future mistakes (<tt>&lt;noinclude>&#123;{transclusionless}}&lt;/noinclude></tt>).

Thanks. --MZMcBride (talk) 22:31, 19 February 2008 (UTC)

Hmm
I wondered if anyone had told you about Articles_for_deletion/List_of_professional_sportspeople_convicted_of_crimes. It seems they hadn't. So I have. --Dweller (talk) 12:51, 5 March 2008 (UTC)

AfD nomination of List of professional sportspeople convicted of crimes
An editor has nominated List of professional sportspeople convicted of crimes, 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 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) 13:00, 5 March 2008 (UTC)