User talk:Pfhreak

Requests
I've noticed that you have added many requests to the Mythology section of the requests page. After going through many of these, I have noticed that several are definitley non-notable, while others do not seem to exist at all. Could you please leave at least one link by each request to help get other editors started. Also, it would certainly help if you created some of these pages yourself. Thank you, Kivar2 (talk) 17:43, 16 June 2008 (UTC)


 * All are (or were) on one of the non-English equivalents to the List of legendary creatures. I added them to Requested Articles rather than starting the pages myself in the hopes of bringing them to the attention of editors familiar with the languages in question, since I couldn't determine if they were notable myself. I'll work on adding links to the non-English articles in question. Pfhreak (talk) 23:23, 29 June 2008 (UTC)


 * This is done. All creatures in question have articles in the Dutch, French, German, or Italian Wikipedias. Pfhreak (talk) 17:27, 29 July 2008 (UTC)


 * Thanks Kivar2 (talk) 18:47, 25 August 2008 (UTC)

Gigantes
Please read this article. Despite the looseness of English, being in requires more than large size: neither Orion nor Talos were earthborn or serpent-footed. A sub-category and a note of explanation at the present cat seems the simplest solution. Septentrionalis PMAnderson 17:40, 5 January 2009 (UTC)
 * I have already read Gigantes. The English word "giant", despite descending through a complicated route from the Greek "gigantes", has become the generic term for superhumanly-large humanoids. I'm not sure if User:Fordmadoxfraud intended to contain all giants or just gigantes, as there are no notes of any kind. I noticed that there was a category for Greek giants and moved the Greek giants into it. Adding  makes sense to me, as  and  already exist. For me the best organization would be:, or  by analogy with , as a subcategory of , then , , and  as subcategories of /. Pfhreak (talk) 22:19, 5 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Cyclopes, if you don't mind. Let us use the correct plurals where English recognizes them.
 * Again, I didn't make or name the category, I'm just reporting what exists. Looking at the revision history for and, it looks like there's been some disagreement about which is preferred, so you'll probably want to start a discussion on the proper name on the talk page for the category. Pfhreak (talk) 22:19, 5 January 2009 (UTC)
 * is also made up of a single race of creature, not a mixture; Hygelac and Harold Hardraada were tall beyond normal mankind, but they are not in the cat. Septentrionalis PMAnderson 21:02, 5 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Depends on if you count bergrisar, eldjötnar, and hrímthursar as all being part of the same race. Some of the stories treat them as three different races of giant beings, especially the eldjötnar, as they have a special role in starting Ragnarök. Similarly, cyclopes, titans, gegeenes, gigantes, and hecatonchires are all separate races of Greek giant. As for "giant" in the sense of unusually tall human vs. "giant" in the sense of mythical giant humanoid, "___ giant" categories are understood to be subcategories of mythical giants, while covers the former. Pfhreak (talk) 22:19, 5 January 2009 (UTC)

Hi, would you be so kind as to give us support!
Hello, I hope you're doing fine and I sincerely apologize for this intrusion. I've just read your profile and I saw that you're a learned and open-minded person deeply interested in reading, discovering culture, and improving your knowledge on diverse matters, so I suppose you know very well what are a minorized language and culture and maybe I am not bothering you and you will help us... I'm a member of a Catalan association "Amical de la Viquipèdia" which is trying to get some recognition as a Catalan Chapter but this hasn't been approved up to this moment because Catalan is not supported by a state even though our Association is working real hard. We would appreciate your support, visible if you stick this on your first page: Wikimedia CAT. Thanks again, wishing you a great summer, take care! Capsot (talk) 20:48, 17 June 2010 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Gliese 169


The article Gliese 169 has been proposed for deletion&#32; because of the following concern:
 * Doesn't seem to meet WP:NASTRO. Although a few references do show up on SIMBAD and Google Scholar, every single one of them simply mentions the star in passing and does not research it.

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. StringTheory11 (t • c) 22:10, 15 July 2013 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Gliese 505


The article Gliese 505 has been proposed for deletion&#32; because of the following concern:
 * Doesn't seem to meet WP:NASTRO.

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. StringTheory11 (t • c) 01:36, 29 July 2013 (UTC)

Nomination of Gliese 902 for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Gliese 902 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/Gliese 902 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. StringTheory11 (t • c) 03:42, 5 August 2013 (UTC)

Nomination of Gliese 169 for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Gliese 169 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/Gliese 169 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. StringTheory11 (t • c) 17:31, 11 August 2013 (UTC)

Nomination of Gliese 453 for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Gliese 453 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/Gliese 453 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. StringTheory11 (t • c) 21:39, 29 December 2013 (UTC)

Nomination of Wolf 635 for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Wolf 635 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/Wolf 635 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. StringTheory11 (t • c) 02:37, 1 January 2014 (UTC)

Nomination of HD 74576 for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article HD 74576 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/HD 74576 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. StringTheory11 (t • c) 17:08, 25 January 2014 (UTC)

Nomination of HD 160346 for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article HD 160346 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/HD 160346 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. StringTheory11 (t • c) 18:31, 7 February 2014 (UTC)

Nomination of Parandrus for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Parandrus 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/Parandrus until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, 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 until the discussion has finished. TNstingray (talk) 12:57, 19 September 2022 (UTC)