User talk:Nuttah/Archive 3

Proposed Deletion: ABCT GLBT Special Interest Group
I addressed your original good faith reason for proposed deletion on the talk page. Are you going to give a second reason or just spam the delete tag? Dkriegls (talk) 17:44, 14 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Thank you for clarifying your position on this. I will address it after further reading. Dkriegls (talk) 18:25, 14 June 2010 (UTC)
 * I would like your feedback regarding the reference below. Pending your review, I would integrate the article's information into the Wikipedia page for this group. What I think the article demonstrates: All five criterion for Notability . The debatable exception is "Independent of the subject". I argue that this citations highlights the influence of this organization on LGBT policy and guidelines within other Wikipedia:Notable psychology organizations (APA), and is reported on by said organizations, thus justifying its own Wikipedia page due to the size limitations of the parent organization's own Wikipedia page. Please not that the article in question is on page 27-28 of the following link:

Thank you for your time Dkriegls (talk) 23:25, 14 June 2010 (UTC)

Speedy deletion declined: Mike Booth
Hello Nuttah. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of Mike Booth, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: The article makes a credible assertion of importance or significance, sufficient to pass A7. Thank you. A le_Jrb talk 11:30, 16 June 2010 (UTC)

Penu Chalykoff and questions about Spellfury
Hi Nuttah, you suggested more notability references on the "Penu Chalykoff" page, added more and took off the warning, could you look at it again and see if I've addressed it with more references to prove notability? Still pretty new at wikipedia :) Also I'm having problems with a user named Eekster who is putting deleting warnings on all the pages I've been working on, despite the fact that I've proved beyond a shadow of a doubt (I'm pretty sure I have anyway) that the webseries "Spellfury" is notable. Could you please have a look at Spellfury and the article deletion page for Spellfury and let me know your thoughts. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Showzampa (talk • contribs) 15:49, 20 June 2010 (UTC)

All these hoaxes
Well spotted. I am normally very reluctant to speedy hoaxes that are not absolutely hit-you-in-the-eye phoney, and I thought seriously of a joint AfD for all this lot, but the more searches I did the more I didn't find anything. Amazing the effort people put into this sort of thing: often they've been copied and pasted from somewhere, like this one, but I didn't find any source for these. As the author hasn't had any formal warnings I have left a #3 one, and will watch his/her progress with considerable interest. Regards, JohnCD (talk) 20:22, 21 June 2010 (UTC)

Speedy deletion declined: Special Edition (band)
Just to let you know that I have declined Special Edition (band) for speedy deletion. This has been nominated before, and was declined, so it cannot be nominated again as a CSD candidate. I would suggest AFD/Improve/Redirect. Stephen! Coming... 15:50, 5 July 2010 (UTC)

Speedy deletion declined: Spartans Futsal Club
Hello Nuttah. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of Spartans Futsal Club, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: '''There's enough there for A7. Competing in an FA league is probably enough (not for football perhaps, but futsal). Will take to AfD.''' Thank you. Ged UK  05:40, 11 July 2010 (UTC)

Speedy deletion declined: Marist St Pats
Hello Nuttah. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of Marist St Pats, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: '''To be holders of a cup notable enough to have its own article is good enough for A7. PROD or take to AfD if required.''' Thank you. Ged UK  07:34, 11 July 2010 (UTC)

AfD nomination of Ménage à 3
An article that you have been involved in editing, Ménage à 3, has been listed for deletion. If you are interested in the deletion discussion, please participate by adding your comments at Articles for deletion/. Thank you.Please contact me if you're unsure why you received this message. Whenaxis (talk) 11:06, 19 July 2010 (UTC)

AfD nomination of Juan Suarez
An article that you have been involved in editing, Juan Suarez, has been listed for deletion. If you are interested in the deletion discussion, please participate by adding your comments at Articles for deletion/. Thank you.Please contact me if you're unsure why you received this message. Whenaxis (talk) 11:18, 20 July 2010 (UTC)

Speedy deletion declined: Georg Hochfilzer
Hello Nuttah, and thanks for patrolling new pages! I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of Georg Hochfilzer, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: The article makes a credible assertion of importance or significance, sufficient to pass A7. You may wish to review the Criteria for Speedy Deletion before tagging further pages. Thank you. Theleftorium (talk) 09:47, 25 July 2010 (UTC)

AfD nomination of Jalan Duta Interchange (DUKE)
An article that you have been involved in editing, Jalan Duta Interchange (DUKE), has been listed for deletion. If you are interested in the deletion discussion, please participate by adding your comments at Articles for deletion/. Thank you.Please contact me if you're unsure why you received this message. &mdash; KuyaBriBri Talk 20:59, 30 July 2010 (UTC)

The Deletion of Darryl Dobbs
Thank you again Nuttah - especially for that WP:OTHERCRAPEXISTS tip. Didn't mean to imply that Wysh is crap - it's great, and he is runs a great blog (and is a colleague of Dobbs').

So are those two references I gave you Fantasy Sports Business and The Daily Seagull are suitable? With those two, in addition to the 10 that are on there, how many more should I dig up (while steering clear of just linking to his work at different sources, of course), in your experience? I tried to put this page through for him three years ago but was declined. But since then, with his site growing from several thousand hits a month to several million hits a month, I wanted to try again - especially with his body of work and the list of people who reference him having grown so much. Help me push this over the top, tips are appreciated. You're an insider, you can help - you know how the panel thinks. Dobbs publishes an online pdf 120-page every six months - can/should that work be referenced? Is 10,000 annual sales of this magazine (and growing) hold any salt with Wiki? Again, thanks for your time.

Eksfactor (talk) 21:44, 31 July 2010 (UTC)Eksfactor

Meonstoke
Hi. I have expanded the article on Meonstoke. However, as I am new to this game, I thought I’d contact people who have contributed to the article as it now stands before I change it. My proposed version is on my user talk page. If you are interested, I’d welcome any comment, changes, suggestions. Thanks Gramorak (talk) gramorak 11:44, 2 August 2010 (UTC)

Speedy deletion : FlexGen
Hello Nuttah, thanks for patrolling new pages. I am just letting you know that the page in question is made carefully and with the wikipedia guidelines in hand. We've therfore contested the speedy deletion. Furthermore I'd like to join previous contributors in asking you to mark a page for deletion by listing it at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion. If you feel the any information on the page is not conform guidelines or not objective please let me know what particular section you feel should be edited. Thanks. Jorisparmentier (talk • contribs) 12:48, 2 August 2010 (UTC)

Good News Weekly
You PRODded this in June, and it was deleted. Undeletion has been requested at WP:REFUND, so per WP:DEL I have restored it, and now notify you in case you wish to take it to AfD. Regards, JohnCD (talk) 20:07, 5 September 2010 (UTC)

Upton Grey
Nuttah: I have not the remotest intention of vandalising anything. My intention is purely to publish objective, verifiable information about Upton Grey.

However, you will appreciate that it is indescribably frustrating for me that you remove such information without explaining why.

You seem even to take exception to my naming the pub within the village. Heaven help wikipedia if naming a building constitutes advertising.

We are both, I assume, adults. So I implore you to allow a grown-up conversation in which we can establish your objection to my copy. For the life of me I am genuinely perplexed by what irks you within any of what I have written. I have made small changes to accommodate what I imagine you might dislike, but if you don't tell me your gripe, how can we even inch towards a compromise? This way of proceeding does nothing but harm to wikipedia.

I assure you again that I have the best of intentions. Let us work together - in the spirit of the site - and publish objective information.

So, please, tell me where the problem lies, and we can fix it, I'm sure.

Hughchev (talk) 16:16, 15 October 2010 (UTC)


 * Our duty is to assume good faith. I'm sorry to say, but I found the way you handled the issue with hughchev yesterday to be contrary to that approach. You could see by the number of posts that he was new. What purpose did it serve to attack him when a gentler, guiding, approach would have achieved the same results?


 * I was tempted to warn you about the 3 revert rule and biting newcomers, both of which you broke, but I realised that it would only add fuel to the fire and would not have solved anything.


 * I purposely write this a day later, when I'm hoping that emotions will have cooled, in the hope that you will take this criticism in the spirit it is intended. Not as a chastisement, but as an invitation to consider whether you could improve the way you deal with other posters. Regards LittleOldMe (talk) 11:01, 16 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Your call, but there were no emotions. I reverted once and made efforts to contact the editor. The editor continued to add the same material and was reverted by another before I was involved again. The poster admits he is trying to 'big up' his village. The edits were promotional and despite efforts to contact were ignored. Your restoration of hughchev's material was reverted inside half hour by a third editor. I've had a long discussion on hughchev's talk page. Nuttah (talk) 20:24, 16 October 2010 (UTC)

Bus routes
Hi. In general I agree with you about the notability of the bus routes you've sent to AfD recently. But you could have avoided all the effort and trouble by just redirecting them to the list of routes for the area (List of bus routes in London or List of bus routes in the West Midlands county) and only AfDing them if they're likely to be controversial. AfD's fairly backlogged already, and two of these have just been relisted. Around 300 non-notables have already been redirected to the London list alone with few difficulties. It might be worth doing the same to some more. Alzarian16 (talk) 09:49, 27 September 2010 (UTC)

In relation to the above, you proposed an AfD on another West Midlands route (45/47 Pershore Road) - this route has been operating for nearly 60 years, has a 5 minute frequency and is a branded route. Most of the information is available on local history forums (which are members only hence no citation) and reference books. The route was already listed on Wikipedia, but no page existed so thatt was why it's corrected. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Andy2510 (talk • contribs) 16:29, 14 November 2010 (UTC)

Speedy deletion declined: Morning parade
Hello Nuttah. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of Morning parade, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: The article makes a credible assertion of importance or significance, sufficient to pass A7. Thank you. Nikkimaria (talk) 19:23, 7 November 2010 (UTC)

Speedy deletion declined: Beneath the Sky
Please be careful when tagging articles for deletion, looking over this article again I hope you agree it is obviously not speedy material. You will be blocked if you continue doing this. Pax:Vobiscum (talk) 21:37, 14 November 2010 (UTC)

Speedy deletion declined: Desphilic
Please be careful when tagging articles for deletion, looking over this article again I hope you agree it is obviously not a proper article for deletion. Are you expert in the subject? If you are come to my talk page and lets talk, If you are not, let somebody to assist you describing the contents to you. You will be blocked if you continue doing this. 16 November 2010 I masoomi —Preceding undated comment added 16:46, 16 November 2010 (UTC).

Warning
Given that your talk page reveals a staggering history of unwarranted speedy deletion tags on valid articles (with the exception of Bryan McMenamin which was a good call) I'm only going to warn you once. You should never have deleted Martti Soosaar from wikipedia. There are plenty of google hits and plenty of books authored by him. In future PLEASE do a quick google check before deleting and add some content yourself, or just ask the editor to at least try to expand it. You are making some serious misjudgements with speedying currently short/unsourced articles which is very damaging to wikipedia if the articles can really be expanded and are notable. Also this article had an Estonian translation tag on it indicating it needed translation. I agree that the article was very short and was certainly questionable but a google search and in google books indicates he is a notable writer. If I see you pulling a stunt like this again (without doing some quick searching on google) I will be opening a formal complaint about you as it hampering the progress of wikipedia. The report will not be a pleasant one for you. You've been warned.♦ Dr. Blofeld  18:04, 11 December 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for your response. You've at least demonstrated you are an intelligent person in evaluating those sources, not the usual trigger happy kid. Well Estonian journalists are not exactly a topic which have massive coverage on the Internet. There should be some independent reliable sources about him, given that he is also active with radio and films aside from newspaper writing and books. PLease do a quick google check, if you are unsure or can't find sources try asking the articles creator to expand it or prod it. That's better than a speedy deletion. I agree that in some cases as with Bryan McMenamin (which I've now redirected as it was a hoax I think) then a speedy deletion may be warranted but only if it is unverifiable. Yes we do have articles which are speedy deletable for not asserting notability but it should be entrusted to you to at least see if the topic can be notable by a google search... If you are absolutely certain that a topic is not notable having checked please state so in the speedy deletion tagging, at least then you have an argument for your course of action. Regards.♦ Dr. Blofeld  19:03, 11 December 2010 (UTC)

I'm usually pretty sure when I write articles that they are encyclopedic and just about meet our notability requirements. I of course like nothing more than for articles to be well-sourced and comprehensive, preferably with many book sources. The important thing though is that we build an encyclopedia. For instance the Martti Soosaar article linked Rein Raamat which spawned an article and in turn which has highlighted Elbert Tuganov. These are very notable animators in Estonia and are definately worth articles. I just think it is better to try to do a little research before nuking everything which is lacking that's all. The Soosaar article may still be lacking in comprehension and evidence of wide coverage but at least its an improvement and wikipedia in my view at least is stronger for having it than not..♦ Dr. Blofeld  20:12, 11 December 2010 (UTC)

Vandalism
Your deletion of my three recent edits to the pages on Chichester, Littlehampton and Bognor Regis as "vandalism" strikes me as being somewhat Fascist. These edits were statements of fact, and the material concerned is available at Public Libraries throughout West Sussex, and Tourist Information Centres. By all means, I would accept the removal of the internet hyperlinks on the basis that they could represent commercial prejudice, but to class the edits as "vandalism" beggars belief. I have no time to waste contesting these issues with you, so you can be assured that all such involvement with Wikipedia on my part will cease forthwith. To that extent you have been successful in your mission. Barrypyatt (talk) 11:03, 26 December 2010 (UTC)BarrypyattBarrypyatt (talk)

Contested proposed deletion, undeleted on request.
FYI, I undeleted Panzer Division (band) on request as a contested proposed deletion (request received via email.), it's an article you'd PROD'd on notability grounds. (Not to be confused with Panzer division (band), which was deleted via CSD A7.) No prejudice on my part against taking that to AfD, your call. Have a great day. -- j &#9883; e decker  talk  21:31, 4 January 2011 (UTC)

Speedy deletion declined on Harris & Harris Group
Hi. I've declined this speedy. If you're interested in the rationale, it is on Talk:Harris_%26_Harris_Group.--v/r - TP 13:11, 21 June 2011 (UTC)

Chris Eskola
Just a note that I have undeleted this article per a request at WP:REFUND. --Ron Ritzman (talk) 03:36, 13 July 2011 (UTC)

Buses in Portsmouth
See my response at Articles for deletion/List of bus routes in Portsmouth area. Half of the stuff you refer to as "original research" is in fact accurate, and your "corrections" completely wrong. Southdown ran in Portsmouth since 1946, when the joint running agreement was signed with the council company, not 1948. Hants & Dorset served the city in NBC days via a joint route with Southdown from Southampton, numbered X71. Provincial was never owned by Southampton - it was independent until 1995, when it was sold to First, who acquired Southampton later. And the pre-1986 company, while known in some circles as City of Portsmouth Passenger Transport Department, was also called Portsmouth Corporation Transport, which is what the PCT in the article refers to - not the later Portsmouth City Transport, which was formed in 1986 and renamed Portsmouth Citybus in 1988. All of this can be easily verified in reliable sources both on and offline. Just how much research did you do before posting this comment? Alzarian16 (talk) 16:23, 28 July 2011 (UTC)

South Coast derby
Thanks for the note. The Guardian article is full of nonsense itself and is not a very good source. I'll get back to you later with a fuller explanation. Daemonic Kangaroo (talk) 07:18, 24 October 2011 (UTC)

Diana Rosen
Hey; I've declined the CSD request for Diana Rosen. She has a claim to significance (although PROD/AFD may be appropriate) - regards, Ironholds (talk) 00:35, 21 June 2012 (UTC)

Voodoo Loons
Please note that I am contesting the speedy deletion (or any deletion) of the Voodoo Loons page. The band has a discography of 4 releases, has had numerous articles published about them in U.S. and Irish publications, and has songs in rotation in numerous broadcast playlists, as well as in the rotation of SiriusXM Satellite Radio, which transmits throughout North America and parts of northern Europe. How do you verify that music is or isn't in rotation? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ikoman (talk • contribs) 03:20, 15 January 2014 (UTC)

GDP figures
Thanks for your comment on Talk:Bristol about GDP figures. Once I realised it had happened on other city articles I put a comment on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject UK geography which is probably the best place for a wider discussion.&mdash; Rod talk 08:37, 6 February 2015 (UTC)