User talk:Msrasnw/2009

FTSE List
Please look at the list again. Their entire developed country thing is nothing more then a simple paragraph, to which S. Korea, Israel, and Iceland is still not on. When they continue talking about how Korea is being changed to developed, they're not talking about developed countries. They are talking about developed markets. FTSE does which markets are developed or not, not which countries are developed. Hope this helps. Deavenger (talk) 15:37, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Perhaps you don't understand, THEY ARE ABOUT DEVELOPED MARKETS. In fact from their front page
 * "We provide an evolving range of index products to help investors make more informed investment decisions with confidence."
 * Developed Markets =/= (does not equal) developed country. Their so called developed list to which South Korea is being added to, it's still markets. Markets, markets, markets. In fact, looking around their website, it doens't actually do developed country, they just keep on using developed markets. This is why editors kept it out at the developed country page, because FTSE doesn't do developed country, it does developed marekts.
 * By the way, don't trust the media, they make errors all the time. Also, the list you wanted to use from the FTSE developed market list, the first thing it says is market classification.Deavenger (talk) 16:18, 1 February 2009 (UTC)

All our NI measures are measures of markets: marketed output, income derived from selling labour on markets, expenditure on marketed output. Development as commonly talked about invovles markets! I think it involves / should involve other things as well: freedom (Sen) education perhaps we should have list of these as well etc but people talk about the economic development most.

Perhaps I should work more on our intro section or leave this a while (Msrasnw (talk) 17:53, 1 February 2009 (UTC))


 * One, it talks about economy. Markets are economy but economy are not markets. Markets are just one part of an economy. Having a developed markets does not mean that they have a developed economy. As for education and freedom, I agree (maybe not on the freedom part, but that's another issue), as I believe that there are lists that take more then economy into account. Deavenger (talk) 18:20, 1 February 2009 (UTC)

DYK for Sōya (icebreaker)
Shubinator (talk) 18:59, 14 February 2009 (UTC)

Massacre of the Latins
Hello! Please check the article's talk page for a discussion on recent additions by User:LoveMonkey. Thank you. Constantine  ✍  15:36, 21 February 2009 (UTC)

I just notice your additions to the Massacre of the Latins article
Thanks. I am the editor LoveMonkey and I really am not trying to cause allot of mischief I hope Constantine is not too terribly upset with my edits on the article. I feel as he has corrected the article and done a very good job. I feel the article lacked clarity as to what the event was and what caused it. Now that aside. How are you? I hope you are well. I would like to ask you for help on some stochastics relationed articles. Please pretty please? In specific the Athanasios Papoulis article and also maybe start an article on Alexander Poularikas? I have no data for Poularikas. Please pretty please. LoveMonkey (talk) 15:49, 23 February 2009 (UTC)

Dear LoveMonkey I am not sure what you would like me to do and I don't know of either Athanasios Papoulis or Alexander Poularikas. Best wishes in anycase. (Msrasnw (talk) 17:45, 23 February 2009 (UTC))
 * Oh I though you where a statician who might have studied them. Sorry.

LoveMonkey (talk) 18:07, 23 February 2009 (UTC)

I am - but my knowledge does not extend as far as either of these two people. Best wishes (Msrasnw (talk) 18:15, 23 February 2009 (UTC))

Yeo Ok
I guess the article should be renamed "Gongmudohaga" because there is almost none about her biography. I'm referring to Korean encyclopedias, she is just briefly mentioned. The poem takes a very important place in Korean literature and the article contents are more focused on the poem. Gonghuin is a form of song adapted from Gongmudohaga although the poem is also called Gonghuin.--Caspian blue 00:39, 28 February 2009 (UTC)

p.s After brief search, Konghuin (Gonghuin's another Romanization by McCune-Reischauer) is much widely used than Kongmudohaga, so I guess the title should be "Gonghuin".--Caspian blue 00:44, 28 February 2009 (UTC)

It might be nice if we are the only ones to have a page for her. Even if it is only little it is nice little tale from long long ago. (Msrasnw (talk) 00:48, 28 February 2009 (UTC))
 * But there would be no more incoming sources on her biography....--Caspian blue 00:50, 28 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Oos, sorry I found an article on her biography, so we are not the only one to have such article. However, except minor facts, the info in the Korean encyclopedia is as much as our article is.--Caspian blue 00:54, 28 February 2009 (UTC)

(Edit conflict!!!) Perhaps another article on the other old poems as well might be nice then I could keep this one on her. I think with the picture from http://www1.korea-np.co.jp/pk/021st_issue/97121002.htm which looks old and should be copy write free (but how to tell? ) would make it a lovely little article. Best wishes (Msrasnw (talk) 00:59, 28 February 2009 (UTC))

Draper
Regarding your edits to the Draper page, the comments that you are insisting to add to the article do not belong there, the same comments are also being removed from the mandelson article for WP:COATRACK the comments are of no relevence at all apart from a negative POV against labour, just because a comment is in the press doesn't make it worthy of inclusion in someones biography. I would appreciate it if you stopped adding it woithout discussion. (Off2riorob (talk) 16:04, 15 June 2009 (UTC))

Please see also the comment on the talk page regarding your addition regarding tactical voting, unless the comment is further explained together with a additional cite to support it, then that will also be removed. [] (Off2riorob (talk) 16:12, 15 June 2009 (UTC))

Brought from my talk page.. please continue discussion here if required Dear Off2riorob, reporting what Mandelson and Draper have said is not anti-labour. I think you are really accusing them of behaving in an anti-Labour fashion and you might have a point there, but covering this up is to condone their actions. Your edits seem to me to be ridding articles of useful information. Our job is not to be pro or anti labour. I myself am generally pro-labour but have found much of what the new labour people have done to the Party to be reprehensible. Perhaps you might add more information about where Draper has been constructive or some good things he has done that you think are worthy of reporting if you know anything to that effect. (Msrasnw

My reply...Adding some chosen derogatory statement of no value factually or fantasy is of no value to any article. You clain to be pro labour and you dislike ..reprehensible..new labour...I am not bothered..I like to see articles that don't remind me of attack pieces. You are right draper has done plenty of poor stuff and there is more than enough of the simple facts to add to tell a story that is a poor reflection on draper without the silly POV pushing rubbish like the "hunted man" twaddle..Why do you insist on inserting that trash. Please explain to me honestly. (Off2riorob (talk) 5:50 pm, Today (UTC+1))

I did not add it - I restored it. I don't like your going through removing as much as you can get away with. You are, in my view removing useful information from articles which do not match your point of view. Now that is gone what do we know from the wiki entry on Draper about Draper's views of Blair vs Brown around 2005 less or more? Less. You have removed useful information. Why? You don't like our encyclopedia reporting the views of the people the biographies are about. Should we remove the fact that Draper was a labour supporter too - or the whole article? Should we know that Mandelson was writing to Draper about Brown or should this be kept from the public? Should we know more or less? (Msrasnw (talk) 17:05, 15 June 2009 (UTC))

Restoring it is the same as adding it. Please put it back if you can find it anywhere else and can explain it in a worthwhile way....That one isolated unsupported unexplained comment does nothing to explain how draper felt about blair. The press writes things every day to push their POV, they might all be citable but they are not all neutral are they. what has an email supposedly sent from mandelson commenting on brown got to do with drapers views...draper must get emails from lots of people but it doesn't reflect drapers thoughts at all unless he comments on them. (Off2riorob (talk) 17:28, 15 June 2009 (UTC))

Its good to talk about it. Lets have a look at this comment that you added and created its own section for..

 Recommending Tactical Voting against Labour 

In the 2005 General Election Draper urged people to vote tactically against Labour, saying, "I don't want my vote to be used as vindication for Tony Blair, I'd like him to wake up after the election and feel like a hunted man".

I asked what this meant and what was it about and no one knew...please explain this benefits of this addition (Off2riorob (talk) 17:41, 15 June 2009 (UTC))

Like .. something that requires it's own section should be important.. and lets see what it say...In the 2005 election draper urged...it sounds important...so are there any other reports to support this ...what happened after this urging? did people vote tactically against blair? and the hunted man slur, insult. What did blair say about it? ..... It is worthless and unexplained. Why did you replace it? Because it adds something.. (Off2riorob (talk) 17:49, 15 June 2009 (UTC))

Google it and see what you get.. you get us...Wikipedia and the one link that was with the original comment and a couple of blogs also propogating the comment. I read the original link and it explained nothing at all. All that it was, was an insult, it gave nothing of any value. It didn't tell the reader anything, in fact isolated, unexplained comments like that actually encourage the reader to stop reading. People are not looking for each and every newspaper twaddle, they are looking for strong, clear factual comments that are neutral and well reported. (Off2riorob (talk) 18:01, 15 June 2009 (UTC))


 * When I asked what is this about and commented that it was isolated and unexplained and removed it, did you consider my comments and investigate further the addition or did you just add it back without consideration of my coments. (Off2riorob (talk) 18:24, 15 June 2009 (UTC))

Developed market
HOOTmag (talk) 13:06, 16 June 2009 (UTC)
 * As oppose to the changes you made on January 30 here, one can review the relevant source and see that the list of "Developed Countries" does include Israel.
 * As oppose to the changes you made on February 1 here, one can see review the relevant source and see that Israel's status as Developed Market has already been implemented in FTSE indices since September 2008.

Draper
Hi, I have removed your comment and it's link to that awful scandalmongering gardian gossip piece journalism. You are more than welcome to replace the comment with a stronger link. That link has been there b4 and been removed b4. As he is a living person its better to not add press slanderous stories like that one. (Off2riorob (talk) 10:04, 14 July 2009 (UTC))

Speedy deletion nomination of of Wright Institute
A tag has been placed on Wright Institute, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done for the following reason:

Coatrack, derek draper

Under the criteria for speedy deletion, articles that do not meet basic Wikipedia criteria may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as an appropriate article, and if you can indicate why the subject of this article is appropriate, you may contest the tagging. To do this, add  on the top of the page 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 confirm its subject's notability under the guidelines.

For guidelines on specific types of articles, you may want to check out our criteria for biographies, for web sites, for bands, or for companies. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. Off2riorob (talk) 12:16, 14 July 2009 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Wright Institute
A proposed deletion template has been added to the article Wright Institute, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process&#32; because of the following concern:
 * Non-notable, fails WP:ORG.

All contributions are appreciated, but this article may not satisfy Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice should explain why (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the  notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised because, even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. ApprenticeFan talk  contribs 12:29, 14 July 2009 (UTC)

Thomas Palley
This is an automated message from CorenSearchBot. I have performed a web search with the contents of Thomas Palley, and it appears to include a substantial copy of http://www.thomaspalley.com/?page_id=11. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material; such additions will be deleted. You may use external websites as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. See our copyright policy for further details.

This message was placed automatically, and it is possible that the bot is confused and found similarity where none actually exists. If that is the case, you can remove the tag from the article and it would be appreciated if you could drop a note on the maintainer's talk page. CorenSearchBot (talk) 12:55, 22 July 2009 (UTC)

The source was listed and appropriately cited and the article is substantially adjusted. (Msrasnw (talk) 15:00, 31 July 2009 (UTC))

Reply : Yoon Sim-Deok
The source is on the credits of the film version "Saui ch'anmi/In Praise of Death" (or a Psalm of Death, Korean: 사의 찬미).

Have a good day.

-- Kookyunii (talk) 14:33, 31 July 2009 (UTC)

Guest.
Thank you for your comments, I did actually meet guest once and he has very recently died and I would like to keep things a litle tidy there, we can add things of course but if we can keep it a bit, whats the word I am looking for...honest and respectful I would appreciate it. He has only really become notable on his early death. It's a bit sad really as his life was just looking good. I am ok with you from our earlier meeting, editing conflict need to be forgotten and we can all move on. Regards(Off2riorob (talk) 19:35, 9 August 2009 (UTC))

William Weston (Early English Navigator) or William Weston (Merchant)
Hi, I'd merge them into William Weston (Explorer) - your title is too long, mine is not as intersting - so 'explorer' seems best I'd say. What do you think? I think mine could work as an intro with your text as the main body. Thanks:) Malick78 (talk) 19:48, 27 August 2009 (UTC)


 * That's great. Shall we nominate it for a DYK? I'm off for a few days so will be away from the internet, but if you want to go ahead and nominate it feel free :) Malick78 (talk) 09:28, 28 August 2009 (UTC)


 * I've done loads of them and pictures/boxes really are optional and not a prerequisite :) I'll be back on Sunday evening so maybe I can do it then - it'll still be within the 5 day period - if you're nnot feeling confident ;) Malick78 (talk) 09:42, 28 August 2009 (UTC)


 * Thankyou for the explanation Msrasnw. I will fix the credits for you and verify the article :) Gatoclass (talk) 10:31, 29 August 2009 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of The Uses of Literacy
A tag has been placed on The Uses of Literacy, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G11 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page seems to be unambiguous advertising which 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 guidelines on spam as well as FAQ/Business for more information.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding  to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the page does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that they userfy the page or have a copy emailed to you. I dream of horses @ 00:24, 31 August 2009 (UTC)

Talkback
I dream of horses If you reply here, please leave me a message on my talk page. @ 00:40, 31 August 2009 (UTC)

Help
I want to complain about an administrator User:Protonk who speedily deleted a page I had written The Uses of Literacy - and was working on. It was only one paragraph with rewording and citing but with a quote (in quotation marks) from the source. It was from one source but it was, in my view appropriately cited. Protonk speedily deleted it as obvious copyright violation, which I dispute, and refused to help me with how to find out how to undelete it or complain. Just told me to write it again. How can I complain and to who?(Msrasnw (talk) 12:49, 31 August 2009 (UTC))


 * I think that the appropriate place would be in Wikiquette alerts.  Chzz  ►  16:16, 31 August 2009 (UTC)

Holt tractor
Hi there, thanks for providing the article on the Holt tractor. Just a thought : were there Holt tractors used for other purposes ? If so, I'm thinking maybe rename this article about the specific military vehicles "Holt artillery tractor" to separate it from others ? I think this particular vehicle was pretty important militarily. regards, Rod Rcbutcher (talk) 02:09, 4 September 2009 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of "Icelandic Society for the Protection of Birds"


The article "Icelandic Society for the Protection of Birds" has been proposed for deletion&#32; because of the following concern:
 * Duplicate of the same article title, without the quotation marks

While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the  notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing  will stop the Proposed Deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. The Speedy Deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and Articles for Deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. - Unforgiven24 Talk|Contribs 13:50, 4 September 2009 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for File:Manchestermoth.JPG
Thanks for uploading or contributing to File:Manchestermoth.JPG. I notice the file page specifies that the file is being used under fair use but there is not a suitable explanation or rationale as to why each specific use in Wikipedia constitutes fair use. Please go to the file description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'file' 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 "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. ww2censor (talk) 01:03, 9 September 2009 (UTC)


 * Looks good. Cheers. ww2censor (talk) 16:14, 9 September 2009 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Naked Heart Foundation


The article Naked Heart Foundation has been proposed for deletion&#32; because of the following concern:
 * No third party sourcing or demonstration of notability.

While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the  notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing  will stop the Proposed Deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. The Speedy Deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and Articles for Deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Durova 314 02:02, 10 September 2009 (UTC)

File copyright problem with File:DodoBones ManchesterMuseum2.jpg
Thank you for uploading File:DodoBones ManchesterMuseum2.jpg. However, it currently is missing information on its copyright status. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously. It may be deleted soon, unless we can determine the license and the source of the file. If you know this information, then you can add a copyright tag to the image description page.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their license and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link.

If you have any questions, please feel free to ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thanks again for your cooperation. ww2censor (talk) 17:51, 11 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Sorry - again! I have added the PD-self tag I think it is OK now.(Msrasnw (talk) 19:41, 11 September 2009 (UTC))

Disputed non-free use rationale for File:NogginStamp.jpg
Thank you for uploading File:NogginStamp.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale provided for using this file on Wikipedia may not meet the criteria required by Non-free content. This can be corrected by going to the file description page and adding or clarifying the reason why the file qualifies under this policy. Adding and completing one of the templates available from Non-free use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your file is in compliance with Wikipedia policy. Please be aware that a non-free use rationale is not the same as an image copyright tag; descriptions for files used under the non-free content policy require both a copyright tag and a non-free use rationale.

If it is determined that the file does not qualify under the non-free content policy, it might be deleted by an administrator within a few days in accordance with our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions, please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you. ww2censor (talk) 20:06, 22 September 2009 (UTC)

Talkback
Noggin the Nog stamp deletion nomination. ww2censor (talk) 21:22, 22 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Another reply. ww2censor (talk) 15:10, 24 September 2009 (UTC)

Re: deleted "File:DodoBones ManchesterMuseum2.jpg"
Hi Msrasnw,

I have double checked and both pictures are bit-by-bit identical. I can undelete it so you can double check if you wish but I assure you that they are the exact same (and render the same way). -- Luk  talk 12:01, 27 September 2009 (UTC)
 * ✅ File:DodoBones ManchesterMuseum2.jpg. -- Luk  talk 14:10, 27 September 2009 (UTC)

Articles for deletion nomination of Naked Heart Foundation
I have nominated Naked Heart Foundation, an article that you created, for deletion. I do not think that this article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and have explained why at Articles for deletion/Naked Heart Foundation. Your opinions on the matter are welcome at that same discussion page; also, you are welcome to edit the article to address these concerns. Thank you for your time.Please contact me if you're unsure why you received this message.  Mbinebri  talk &larr; 18:34, 7 October 2009 (UTC)

File:NogginStamp.jpg listed for deletion
An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, File:NogginStamp.jpg, has been listed at Files for deletion. Please see the to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. ww2censor (talk) 14:16, 14 October 2009 (UTC)

User:Msrasnw/Matthew Watson
Hello Msrasnw. I added some online versions of his papers to the reference section. In terms of getting the article kept, I wonder if he is the editor of any journals? Have there been published reviews of any of his books? I looked in Google Scholar but he does not seem to have any papers with very high citation counts. The Social Science Citation Index might be something else to try. EdJohnston (talk) 03:44, 11 November 2009 (UTC)


 * Dear EdJohnston, hi thanks for your help. I think the best route to go down is intellectual, talking about his contribution the debates he has been involved in. In British IPE he seems to me one of the key, if new figures, and I would have thought his books alone would be enough to establish him. There is one book review already there - but perhaps references to his work via his contribution is the approach I would find most interesting to go down. Reading articles citing him. Best wishes (Msrasnw (talk) 16:57, 11 November 2009 (UTC))

See his own CV for the positions he holds outside academia.Foxhound66 (talk) 22:50, 14 November 2009 (UTC)

Century of humiliation
hi you are very helpful thank u for ur message. one thing i do not understand is i understand that the article needs sources but i do not understand why it is not neutral. i think it cant be neutral because it is used as a political idea and it is used to make chinese people hate other countries so it can not be a neutral word. can u help me —Preceding unsigned comment added by 莲乸 (talk • contribs) 16:32, 11 November 2009 (UTC)

G'day Msrasnw, I feel terrible about "deceiving" you, but am so incredibly impressed with your actions regarding this page. Please accept this as a small token of my appreciation, and thank you for your hard work, here and everywhere else!

Thanks
For restoring Matthew Watson. Wikipedia editors have zero knowledge and simply delete at whimFoxhound66 (talk) 22:38, 14 November 2009 (UTC)

Matthew Watson
Didn't know he was promoted so fast--he was an assiststant professor last in 2007. Political Economy is not IPE. IPE rest under the school of political science; political economy is that of the economics school.Foxhound66 (talk) 22:53, 14 November 2009 (UTC)
 * i have made some comments on my talk p. about the article draft, and also some at the Deletion Review. Additionally, I suppose you won;t mind if I help you reformat the draft a little. If you have access to SSCI or Scopus, add the citation count, as suggested above. If you can't, I will do that myself.  See if you can find all the book reviews and list them.  Try a revision as I suggested tomorrow, and I'll  look tomorrow night. Unlike some people around here, I like other eds who can find errors in my work.  I am just as susceptible to errors as anyone else, & I have no way of knowing about them unless other people tell me.  DGG ( talk ) 01:02, 22 November 2009 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of The Poverty of "Development Economics"


The article The Poverty of "Development Economics" has been proposed for deletion&#32; because of the following concern:
 * No indication of the notability of this book as per WP:Notability (books)

While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the  notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing  will stop the Proposed Deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. The Speedy Deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and Articles for Deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. --  Phantom Steve / talk &#124; contribs \ 13:21, 15 December 2009 (UTC)


 * Proposed deletion contested --  Phantom Steve / talk &#124; contribs \ 14:01, 15 December 2009 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Ravi Arvind Palat
A tag has been placed on Ravi Arvind Palat, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G4 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be a repost of material that was previously deleted following a deletion debate, such as at articles for deletion. Under the specified criteria, where an article has substantially identical content to that of an article deleted after debate, and any changes in the content do not address the reasons for which the material was previously deleted, it may be deleted at any time.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding  to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the page does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that they userfy the page or have a copy emailed to you. Hairhorn (talk) 18:49, 15 December 2009 (UTC)

AfD nomination of Andrej Grubacic
An editor has nominated one or more articles which you have created or worked on, for deletion. The nominated article is Andrej Grubacic. 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 Notability and "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(s) by adding your comments to Articles for deletion/Andrej Grubacic. 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.

Please note: This is an automatic notification by a bot. I have nothing to do with this article or the deletion nomination, and can't do anything about it. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 01:05, 20 December 2009 (UTC)