User talk:King of Hearts/Archive/2011/11

The Signpost: 31 October 2011
Read this Signpost in full &middot; Single-page &middot; Unsubscribe &middot; EdwardsBot (talk) 17:30, 1 November 2011 (UTC)

(Untitled)
Now see here! I heard that you deleted the Mermade man and Barnicle boy article. That was very important to me! You know, you should be suspended for that! Or, you could bring it back, and make me happy again. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.242.169.123 (talk) 19:24, 6 November 2011 (UTC)

Federica Quercia tennis player
Hi, can you please put again the page about the biography of Quercia Federica? I saw there are many tennis player that made the same results i don't understand why you delete just the page about her. Thank you (87.16.247.71 (talk) 23:09, 6 November 2011 (UTC)).


 * Can you tell me what exact page (capitalization, punctuation, spacing all matter) you are talking about? Quercia Federica has never existed on Wikipedia. -- King of &hearts;   &diams;   &clubs;  &spades; 05:44, 7 November 2011 (UTC)


 * Yes there was a page about Federica Quercia in Wikipedia.org because if now if I follow the link about this page appear:

''This page has been deleted. The deletion and move log for the page are provided below for reference. 06:26, 6 October 2011 King of Hearts (talk | contribs) deleted "Federica Quercia" ‎ (Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Federica Quercia)'' The page was about this Federica Quercia, and about all her result in the tennis tournaments. If you check Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Federica Quercia you will find the discussion about the the proposed deletion of that page. So I'm asking to put this page back if it's bossible. Thank you — Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.59.221.56 (talk) 18:58, 13 November 2011 (UTC)


 * My bad, I forgot to check both orderings of the first and last name. It appears that the notability guidelines for tennis players was changed to raise the threshold from winning a $25K tournament to $50K in August, but the changed was reverted in October. Accordingly I have restored the article, as she has won a $25K tournament. -- King of &hearts;   &diams;   &clubs;  &spades; 08:13, 14 November 2011 (UTC)

The Signpost: 7 November2011
Read this Signpost in full &middot; Single-page &middot; Unsubscribe &middot; EdwardsBot (talk) 12:34, 8 November 2011 (UTC)

The Signpost: 14 November 2011
Read this Signpost in full &middot; Single-page &middot; Unsubscribe &middot; EdwardsBot (talk) 22:42, 14 November 2011 (UTC)

The Signpost: 21 November 2011
Read this Signpost in full &middot; Single-page &middot; Unsubscribe &middot; EdwardsBot (talk) 01:04, 22 November 2011 (UTC)

Anton Singov
Shouldn't Anton Singov be deleted after you closed it's deletion review as deletion endorsed? Armbrust Talk to me about my editsreview  03:12, 29 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Yes. Good catch. -- King of &hearts;   &diams;   &clubs;  &spades; 03:13, 29 November 2011 (UTC)

The Signpost: 28 November 2011

 * Read this Signpost in full
 * Single-page
 * Unsubscribe
 * EdwardsBot (talk) 06:54, 29 November 2011 (UTC)

deletion of page
Hi, please can you create the page of shankhadeep as its now in deleted state, i want to upload the information of it. let me know the process on how to do it properly, so it dont go into deletion again.

mail back: madhulika.rana1@gmail.com — Preceding unsigned comment added by 119.226.62.122 (talk) 07:21, 29 November 2011 (UTC)


 * The reason I deleted the page was because the only content in it was "Shankhadeep-Film Director / This page is under construction. More info will be uploaded in few days." Feel free to recreate it with substantial content. Note that you have to create an account in order to create new articles. -- King of &hearts;   &diams;   &clubs;  &spades; 07:47, 29 November 2011 (UTC)

Climate_change_alarmism merge
You recently closed Articles_for_deletion/Climate_change_alarmism_(2nd_nomination) with a merge to Global warming controversy. However, there was never a notice at that page for those editors to join the discussion. In addition, Global warming controversy is already long enough to be in need of a split. I know that it is not a vote, but I count 8 merge, 12 keep, 5 delete, and I wonder what the results would have been if the editors at the other article were at least informed that another article was about to be merged. Q Science (talk) 08:27, 29 November 2011 (UTC)
 * In general, AfDs proceed without notifying editors at another page that the article being discussed might be merged into. However, I shall emphasize that Articles for deletion does exactly what it says: it decides that either an article is deleted, or it is not deleted. If an article is not deleted, then whatever the decision is should be taken with a grain of salt. Subsequent discussion on an appropriate talk page may conclude that keeping an article is better when the close was a "merge" or vice versa. I recommend that you bring it up for discussion at Talk:Climate change alarmism and Talk:Global warming controversy. -- King of &hearts;   &diams;   &clubs;  &spades; 08:35, 29 November 2011 (UTC)

Westminster Presbyterian Church (Decatur, Illinois)
I would like you to review your closure for Articles for deletion/Westminster Presbyterian Church (Decatur, Illinois). Did you actually look at the results for Google Books? I did, saw that there was plenty, and did my bit by adding one to the article. It's quite absurd to close it as delete on the basis that saying there are plenty of hits isn't good enough. Besides, there were three keeps to two deletes. If there is consensus on this one, it's consensus to keep. StAnselm (talk) 09:45, 29 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Notice also, the policy at WP:N: "Notability requires only the existence of suitable independent, reliable sources, not their immediate citation... If it is likely that significant coverage in independent sources can be found for a topic, deletion due to lack of notability is inappropriate." StAnselm (talk) 10:14, 29 November 2011 (UTC)
 * What that means is that you have to find the specific sources and bring them up in the AfD, but not necessarily include them in the article. A link to Google Books results is not enough, because we don't know that significant coverage exists in those results. As closer I am not allowed to look at the Google Books results, because then I would be forming my own opinion. When closing AfDs, I only review sources that are directly linked to from either the AfD or the article. That said, if you can post some of those sources below I would be willing to restore the article. -- King of &hearts;   &diams;   &clubs;  &spades; 18:16, 29 November 2011 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Memetic Warfare
This article was moved from Memetic Warfare to Memetic warfare during the course of the AfD. When you closed the AfD, it looks like you may have only deleted the redirect page. &mdash;SW&mdash; soliloquize 14:57, 29 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Nevermind, looks like someone else took care of it. &mdash;SW&mdash; comment 16:29, 29 November 2011 (UTC)

A little help please
Hi You, deleted my page today on Memetic Warfare. It is actually a project I had to do for my Grad School Professor. I will of course acquiesce to your decision but if you wouldn't mind restoring it for 48 hours so I can get my grade I would appreciate it greatly.

Thank you very much SignoreMachia (talk) 21:35, 29 November 2011 (UTC)


 * OK, it is available at Memetic warfare and will be taken off on December 2 (UTC). -- King of &hearts;   &diams;   &clubs;  &spades; 01:54, 30 November 2011 (UTC)