User talk:Nalman

Notability
You might want to read up on WP:N some. Looking at your edit summaries, the grounds in which you are removing articles tagged for deletion are not valid arguments. Please check out wikipedia's standards for notability, they may differ from your own. Thanks. Sergecross73  msg me   20:33, 28 September 2011 (UTC)

Sante D'Orazio
Hi, you removed the prod from this entry with the edit summary "Has published lots of books = notability", but it was not prodded for lacking notability, it was prodded as a spam autobiography and generally a junk entry. Feel free to replace the prod if you like. Hairhorn (talk) 20:46, 28 September 2011 (UTC)


 * Deletion should always be the last resort. If he is notable then the article can and should be fixed with heavy editing. Nalman (talk) 20:51, 28 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Yes, but the problem is, is that you've done nothing to establish or prove notability in the first place. A random sourceles claim to "publishing lots of books" doesn't automatically make someone notable in the wikipedia-sense. Sergecross73   msg me   22:50, 28 September 2011 (UTC)

Tulsa Talons Roster nominated for deletion
I have nominated the article Tulsa Talons Roster for deletion on the grounds of content forking. The deletion discussion can be found at Articles for deletion/Tulsa Talons Roster. Tampabay721 (talk) 21:44, 28 September 2011 (UTC)