User talk:Qoncept

Categorization
Please seek an actual consensus before arbitrarily deciding to revise Wikipedia's existing categorization practices by yourself. If and when the "high resolution" system that you propose is actually implemented, it will actually be quite simple to have a bot go through and automatically revise everything to match the new categorization structure, instead of needing a wikiproject to do it manually — but in the meantime, as long as we still use the system that's in place right now, it's not helpful or useful to impose your proposed system before it's actually implemented (especially given that we don't yet have any guarantee that it ever actually will.)

And also, please be aware that Wikipedia applies or  to very general articles about masculinity or femininity, not to individual men or women; if you think we should apply them to all men and all women, you're certainly welcome to propose that for discussion — but as things stand right now, they haven't been used that way to date, and that change would require applying them consistently to all biographical articles on Wikipedia, not just to a few of them.

You might find that if you really want Wikipedia's categorization system to move toward that model, it would be far more productive — and from what I can tell, you seem to have the skills — to actually work with the Wikipedia developers and programmers to design and implement the system, instead of trying to preemptively recategorize over three million articles by yourself.

Thanks. Bearcat (talk) 20:52, 9 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Fair enough; I'd certainly be interested in seeing the proposal if and when it's ready for more widespread discussion. The system we have right now obviously isn't the only way a categorization system could be organized, nor is it necessarily the best way (I'm by no means an expert in systems design, so I couldn't really say one way or the other) — but for better or for worse, it is what it is, and any changes to it would need to be coordinated carefully to minimize any disruption or confusion that could result in the meantime. That's all I'm saying, really. Bearcat (talk) 21:18, 9 September 2011 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Gloria (band)


A tag has been placed on Gloria (band) requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about a band or musician, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable.

If you think that the page was nominated in error, contest the nomination by clicking on the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion" in the speedy deletion tag. Doing so will take you to the talk page where you can explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. You can also visit the page's talk page directly to give your reasons, but be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but do not hesitate to add information that is consistent with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, you can contact one of these administrators to request that the administrator userfy the page or email a copy to you. --- Angel from PAKISTAN  Let's talk about it! 06:06, 23 March 2012 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Annaliese Nielsen‎


The article Annaliese Nielsen‎ has been proposed for deletion. The proposed deletion notice added to the article should explain why.

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.

Your draft article, Draft:Annaliese Nielsen


Hello, Qoncept. It has been over six months since you last edited your Articles for Creation draft article submission, "Annaliese Nielsen".

In accordance with our policy that Articles for Creation is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been nominated for deletion. If you plan on working on it further, or editing it to address the issues raised if it was declined, simply and remove the  or  code.

If your submission has already been deleted by the time you get there, and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion by following the instructions at this link. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. 78.26  (spin me / revolutions) 21:25, 19 June 2017 (UTC)