User talk:Defender of torch

New Arbitration Enforcement case: Dilip rajeev
Kindly note the WP:AE case above has just been filed. Ohconfucius ¡digame! 05:50, 10 March 2010 (UTC)

Cyber-Ark
Since you argued to keep it, could you please help clean it up? -- Orange Mike  &#x007C;   Talk  17:00, 21 April 2010 (UTC)

Resistencia Civil
Hello. In February you added a citation to a book from the "Webster's Quotations" series published by Icon Group International to this article. Unfortunately, Icon Group International is not a reliable source - their books are computer-generated, with most of the text copied from Wikipedia (most entries have [WP] by them to indicate this). I'm removing a lot of similar references; many other editors have also been deceived by these sources. A similar publisher that reuses Wikipedia content is Alphascript Publishing. Fences &amp;  Windows  22:08, 23 July 2010 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Making Our Economy Right


A tag has been placed on Making Our Economy Right, requesting that it be deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under two or more of the criteria for speedy deletion, by which articles can be deleted at any time, without discussion. If the page meets any of these strictly-defined criteria, then it may be soon be deleted by an administrator. The reasons it has been tagged are:
 * It is a very short article providing little or no context to the reader. (See section A1 of the criteria for speedy deletion.) Wikipedia has standards for the minimum necessary information to be included in short articles; you can see these at Wikipedia:Stub. Also please note that articles must be on notable subjects and should provide references to reliable sources that verify their content.
 * It appears to be about a person, organization (band, club, company, etc.), individual animal, or web content, 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. (See section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion.) Such articles may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable.
 * It appears to be about something made up, and 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. (See section A11 of the criteria for speedy deletion.)

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. Aashaa (talk) 14:17, 8 June 2015 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!
MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 14:07, 24 November 2015 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Objectivism in India


The article Objectivism in India has been proposed for deletion&#32;because of the following concern: "Not notable, all content is primary sources or not about Objectivism - see related discussion at WP:AFD."

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. Dr. Fleischman (talk) 19:43, 5 July 2017 (UTC)