User talk:Plasmatics

Regarding Requests_for_comment/BigDaddy777
Since you endorsed the original RfC, I thought you might be interested to know that since the dispute resolution process has stalled due to BigDaddy's refusal to respond to this RfC, some are now questioning whether an RfAr should be filed. Your comments on this new issue would be appreciated. Mr. Tibbs 04:37, 29 September 2005 (UTC)

Unreferenced BLPs
Hello Plasmatics! Thank you for your contributions. I am a bot alerting you that 1 of the articles that you created  is tagged as an Unreferenced Biography of a Living Person. The biographies of living persons policy requires that all personal or potentially controversial information be sourced. In addition, to ensure verifiability, all biographies should be based on reliable sources. If you were to bring this article up to standards, it would greatly help us with the current Category:All_unreferenced_BLPs article backlog. Once the article is adequately referenced, please remove the unreferencedBLP tag. Here is the article:

Thanks!--DASHBot (talk) 17:13, 17 January 2010 (UTC)
 * 1) Tony Hajjar -

Proposed deletion of Low poly


The article Low poly has been proposed for deletion&#32; because of the following concern:
 * neologism; subjective analysis of relative polygon counts, not a subject in itself to be supported by reliable sources

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. Chris Cunningham (user:thumperward) - talk 21:39, 5 July 2011 (UTC)

Nomination of Low poly for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Low poly 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/Low poly 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 good 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 template from the top of the article.  SilkTork  *Tea time 16:22, 12 July 2011 (UTC)

Nomination of Low poly for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Low poly 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/Low poly (2nd nomination) 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 good 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 template from the top of the article. — This, that, and the other (talk) 10:57, 8 October 2011 (UTC)