User talk:In Defense of the Artist

Dawn
Hi. :-) Just to let you know I have found and responded to the issues you raised on the talk page of the Dawn article, and have removed the section of text in question.

If anyone does think that this point should be put back (hopefully with a better context, unless I am misinterpreting the intended reference), then they can replace it. More info is on the article's talk page. :-)

Thanks. Leevclarke 02:22, 21 July 2007 (UTC)

Clabbered
FYI, although I removed that section from Guacamole, clabbered is an actual word. It means "curdled", being derived from the curdled milk dish known as clabber. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ben James Ben (talk • contribs) 03:22, 16 October 2007 (UTC)


 * In Guacamole, you re-added the sentence "In New Zealand and other areas of the Oceania Pacific, guacamole is often combined with beaten egg whites creating a clabbered texture and has become an increasingly popular serving with spaghetti." I removed it from the article because I suspect that it was vandalism. Are you saying that the statement is actually true? --Ben James Ben 13:21, 16 October 2007 (UTC)

FYI, I reverted your edit to Guacamole, the one where you re-added text that I previously identified as vandalism. Please see the Talk page for details. I just felt that intentionally leaving vandalism in the article was not the best course of action. --Ben James Ben 03:54, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

Wikifacist
Thanks, but even though I tried adding it, it only took about 5 minutes, and then it got deleted once again, and I got a warning by some jerk, that I'd be blocked if I added it again.. But this is a good entry though: http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=wikifascist

And this one is too: http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=deletist KnatLouie 10:18, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

Sorry, I don't know how to report a deletist. But even if I did know, I'm sure my requests would be ignored because I'm not an administrator of this site (ie. I have a life ;). KnatLouie (talk • contribs) 13:28, 26 October 2007 (UTC)

Best of Luck
I read your user page and just want to tell you I support what you're trying to accomplish here. It is frustrating to come up against the people who delete based on the "Because I'VE never heard of it" principal. I'm not familiar with everyone on the list you posted, but I am with some of them. And all that tells me is you're a better source for that information than I am. Keep up the good work. J. Van Meter (talk) 15:45, 27 January 2008 (UTC)

Mother (Improv)
A tag has been placed on Mother (Improv), requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article seems to be blatant 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 11, as well as the guidelines on spam.

If you can indicate why the subject of this article is not blatant advertising, you may contest the tagging. To do this, please add  on the top of Mother (Improv) and leave a note on the article's talk page explaining your position. 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. ←Signed:→ Mr. E. Sánchez  Get to know me! / Talk to me! ←at≈:→ 18:09, 9 September 2008 (UTC)


 * Take that! The Mother (Improv) article remains!  Score one for the good guys (and just about infinity for the deletists). --In Defense of the Artist (talk) 14:59, 23 November 2008 (UTC)

File permission problem with File:Baby-with-the-Bathwater.jpg
Thanks for uploading File:Babywiththebathwater.jpg I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file agreed to license it under the given license.

If you created this media entirely yourself but have previously published it elsewhere (especially online), please either
 * make a note permitting reuse under the GFDL or another acceptable free license (see this list) at the site of the original publication; or
 * Send an email from an address associated with the original publication to [mailto:permissions-en@wikimedia.org permissions-en@wikimedia.org], stating your ownership of the material and your intention to publish it under a free license. You can find a sample permission letter here.

If you did not create it entirely yourself, please ask the person who created the file to take one of the two steps listed above, or if the owner of the file has already given their permission to you via email, please forward that email to [mailto:permissions-en@wikimedia.org permissions-en@wikimedia.org].

If you believe the media meets the criteria at Non-free content, use a tag such as or one of the other tags listed at Image copyright tags, and add a rationale justifying the file's use on the article or articles where it is included. See Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have provided evidence that their copyright owners have agreed to license their works under the tags you supplied, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link. Files lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.  MBisanz  talk 01:33, 8 July 2009 (UTC)

Unreferenced BLPs
Hello In Defense of the Artist! Thank you for your contributions. I am a bot alerting you that 2 of the articles that you created  are  Unreferenced Biographies of Living Persons. Please note that all biographies of living persons must be sourced. If you were to add reliable, secondary sources to these articles, it would greatly help us with the current  article backlog. Once the articles are adequately referenced, please remove the unreferencedBLP tag. Here is the list:

Thanks!--DASHBot (talk) 16:49, 2 January 2010 (UTC)
 * 1) Oskar Eustis -
 * 2) Aspen Miller -

Nomination of The Nodd for deletion
The article The Nodd is being discussed concerning whether it is suitable for inclusion as an article according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Articles for deletion/The Nodd 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.  Ja Ga  talk 22:52, 13 February 2011 (UTC)

Nomination of All The Rage for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article All The Rage 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/All The Rage 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. ConcernedVancouverite (talk) 04:08, 15 September 2011 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of All The Rage


A tag has been placed on All The Rage requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A9 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about a musical recording which does not indicate why its subject is important or significant, and where the artist's article has never existed, has been deleted or is eligible for deletion itself. 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 music.

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 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. ConcernedVancouverite (talk) 15:49, 15 September 2011 (UTC)

Nomination of Organic Surrealism for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Organic Surrealism 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/Organic Surrealism 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.  RepublicanJacobite  TheFortyFive 17:11, 6 October 2011 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of National Association of Performing Artists


The article National Association of Performing Artists has been proposed for deletion&#32; because of the following concern:
 * Disamb page without links to actual articles, as it appears the organizations referenced are not notable.

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. ConcernedVancouverite (talk) 20:18, 2 June 2013 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Dirty South Improv


A tag has been placed on Dirty South Improv 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 an organization or company, 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 read more about what is generally accepted as notable.

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, you can place a request here. ConcernedVancouverite (talk) 20:20, 2 June 2013 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Mother (improv group)


The article Mother (improv group) has been proposed for deletion&#32; because of the following concern:
 * Non-notable entertainment group with single passing mention in a book as the only independent source.

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. ConcernedVancouverite (talk) 01:22, 3 June 2013 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Creative drama


The article Creative drama has been proposed for deletion&#32; because of the following concern:
 * WP:NEO. Non-notable, non-reliably source cited genre.

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. ConcernedVancouverite (talk) 01:25, 3 June 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for August 4
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited What a Man (song), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page What a Man (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 22:58, 4 August 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for November 24
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Doctor Who (2013 specials), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page The Moment (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:04, 24 November 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for January 8
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Cyberman, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Closing Time (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:02, 8 January 2014 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for January 24
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Viewpoints, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Pitch (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 08:59, 24 January 2014 (UTC)

Nomination of The Love Cats (film) for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article The Love Cats (film) 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/The Love Cats (film) 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. Wgolf (talk) 22:38, 3 September 2014 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for March 7
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Catsuits and bodysuits in popular media, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Alphaville. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:21, 7 March 2015 (UTC)

Possibly unfree File:Lifeboat.JPG
A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Lifeboat.JPG, has been listed at Possibly unfree files because its copyright status is unclear or disputed. If the file's copyright status cannot be verified, it may be deleted. You may find more information on the file description page. You are welcome to add comments to its entry at if you object to the listing for any reason. Thank you. Stefan2 (talk) 19:13, 4 November 2015 (UTC)

Possibly unfree File:Greek Frogs.jpg
A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Greek Frogs.jpg, has been listed at Possibly unfree files because its copyright status is unclear or disputed. If the file's copyright status cannot be verified, it may be deleted. You may find more information on the file description page. You are welcome to add comments to its entry at if you object to the listing for any reason. Thank you. Stefan2 (talk) 19:14, 4 November 2015 (UTC)

Image source problem with File:Black-and-tan spoon.jpg
Thank you for uploading File:Black-and-tan spoon.jpg.

This image is a derivative work, containing an "image within an image". Examples of such images would include a photograph of a sculpture, a scan of a magazine cover, or a screenshot of a computer game or movie. In each of these cases, the rights of the creator of the original image must be considered, as well as those of the creator of the derivative work.

While the description page states who made this derivative work, it currently doesn't specify who created the original work, so the overall copyright status is unclear. If you did not create the original work depicted in this image, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright.

If you have uploaded other derivative works, consider checking that you have specified their source and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have created [ in your upload log]. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the image is copyrighted under a non-free license (per Fair use) then the image will be deleted 48 hours after 19:20, 4 November 2015 (UTC). If the file is already gone, you can still make a request for undeletion and ask for a chance to fix the problem. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Stefan2 (talk) 19:20, 4 November 2015 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of American Music Theatre Project


The article American Music Theatre Project has been proposed for deletion&#32;because of the following concern: "Overwhelmingly unsourced and therefore afoul of WP:OR. Also begs the question as to its worth on Wikipedia as it just appears to be a list of college productions."

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.

''' This bot DID NOT nominate any of your contributions for deletion; please refer to the history of each individual page for details. ''' Thanks, FastilyBot (talk) 10:01, 3 January 2024 (UTC)