User talk:Quadell/Archive 47

FAR
nominated Louisville, Kentucky for a featured article review here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets featured article criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. If substantial concerns are not addressed during the review period, the article will be moved to the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Remove" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. YellowMonkey  ( cricket photo poll! ) paid editing=POV 01:08, 28 July 2009 (UTC)

Demographics of the Supreme Court of the United States FA-drive
Sorry for spamming you, but in light of the impending shift of the Demographics of the Supreme Court of the United States, I'd like to get this article up to FA status within the next few weeks, and ready for the front page by the time the Court starts its fall term. Any help or advice you can provide would be appreciated. Cheers! bd2412 T 01:20, 2 August 2009 (UTC)

Going straight to the guy who will probably figure it out...
Allo. To be honest, I don't even remember the pages (on wikipedia and on commons) for listing images with bad licensing, so since you're easily the guy who figures things out most often, I'm just taking this straight to to you. :) The problem is with this: File:Squeak.svg (and, of course, ) They're listing the Squeak Smalltalk logo as their own work. However, um, I can't see how it could be. It looks like the "author" has already had one of his other uploads deleted on him (did you know he created the Google Chrome logo? Me neither). I'm sure it's an honest mistake. To be honest, I don't think most people realize that tracing someone else's work into an SVG constitutes a derivative work. but, still, it is. So, any chance you can figure out all that complimicated stuff? :D 72.88.70.180 (talk) 22:19, 3 August 2009 (UTC)

MSF FAR
nominated Médecins Sans Frontières for a featured article review here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets featured article criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. If substantial concerns are not addressed during the review period, the article will be moved to the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Remove" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. Jclemens (talk) 05:39, 4 August 2009 (UTC)

GA reassessment of Lancia Flaminia
I have conducted a reassessment of the above article as part of the GA Sweeps process. I have found some concerns with the article which you can see at Talk:Lancia Flaminia/GA1. I have placed the article on hold whilst these are fixed. I am letting you know as you are a major contributor to this article. Thanks. Jezhotwells (talk) 22:20, 9 August 2009 (UTC)

File:Church Army Chapel pews 1965.jpg
Hi Quadell. Please could you kindly look at the above image file for me? I am the uploader.

(1) I have a letter from the copyright owner giving permission for the image on Church Army Chapel, Blackheath page only, but I don't know the Wikipedia address to send the scan of the letter.

(2) I have written a rationale for good measure, but can't find the appropriate licence template for that. Any assistance would be appreciated. Thanks.--Storye book (talk) 11:00, 13 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Update: I have now got the email address and sent the permissions letter to Wikipedia, but no reply as yet. I found a licence template for a rationale, and expanded the rationale, but it strikes me that the rationale template and the permissions letter contradict each other - as the template says there is no copyright permission for use on the Wiki page, when I do have permission.--Storye book (talk) 19:53, 15 August 2009 (UTC)

Level 3 Vital articles
Hi! Inspired by this proposal, I decided to inspect our vital articles. I decided to add a bunch to Vital articles/Level/3/Technology. At the time, I thought that the number in parenthesis was the current number of articles (out of 100 allotted per topic, I presumed) and "updated" the number. When I was looking over it again, I realized my mistake, and I'd fix it myself except that the allotments don't add up to 1000. The other 9 add up to 925, leaving Technology 75 instead of 95. (There are now 83 articles in the topic). So looking through the page history, you looked like the person to contact. So can you juggle the allocations please? thanks, HereToHelp (talk to me) 19:25, 15 August 2009 (UTC)


 * (Followup post) I've gone through and tallied the number of articles in each category; it comes to 1042. I think that striving for 1000 exactly is a little OCD and excludes articles from being presented as important to work on. Thus I propose the following reworked allocation scheme, based on the lists that have developped:


 * Art: 70 (+0)
 * Geography: 100 (+0)
 * History: 135 (+5)
 * Language: 70 (+10)
 * Life: 95 (-35)
 * Mathematics: 35 (+5)
 * Philosophy: 105 (+25)
 * Science: 235 (+10)
 * Society: 120 (+20)
 * Technology: 80 (-15)
 * Total: 1045 (+45)
 * I think that trying to cut more than a few articles from each section (what is there now, not what was allocated) is foolish and hurts the encyclopedia. We are not bound by the Dewey decimal system to work in powers of 10. (Finding, and asking for help on, 10,000 articles is wholly impractical.) If you like, you can distribute another 5 articles somewhere to make a "prettier" 1050. Cheers, HereToHelp (talk to me) 20:31, 15 August 2009 (UTC)


 * Even better: after organizing the lists and finding many duplicates, the total is now 991. I'll go ahead and re-shuffle the allocations since you seem to be on Wikibreak…hopefully that's okay… HereToHelp (talk to me) 16:41, 17 August 2009 (UTC)

Can Polbot fix it?
BirdLife International have modified their website so that all their bird pages have different names, and so this has broken all the external links on the wiki. A few external links have been fixed manually, such as by this edit on the Scarlet-chested Parrot article. There is more than one format in which the external link to BirdLife International is listed in wiki articles. See Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Birds. Can a Polbot-like script fix it? Snowman (talk) 09:39, 19 August 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for ...
Thanks for wishing me a happy wiki-birthday (Sorry, it's been 4 months though,) ! Almost a month ago, it was my real birthday. Pilover819 -116.127.84.141 (talk) 06:21, 8 September 2009 (UTC)

WP:Suggestions for disambiguation repair
All the entries to be added to articles have now been done, all that's left are redirects, piping and similar and many of these are actually valid. I don't think anyone's edited any more of them in weeks, although PamD and I are both looking forward to the next batch of entries to be added (on my part, only really the hndis entries). Thanks for keeping us busy, and let us know when your next lot's ready. All the best, Boleyn3 (talk) 08:17, 8 September 2009 (UTC)

Templates for deletion nomination of Template:Bridgenote
Template:Bridgenote has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for Deletion page. Thank you. Neelix (talk) 23:45, 12 September 2009 (UTC)

File:Atta atm.jpg listed for deletion
An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, File:Atta atm.jpg, has been listed at Files for deletion. Please see the to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. ÷seresin 02:51, 22 September 2009 (UTC)

NowCommons: File:RICHARDBOONE.jpg
File:RICHARDBOONE.jpg is now available on Wikimedia Commons as Commons:File:RICHARDBOONE.jpg. This is a repository of free media that can be used on all Wikimedia wikis. The image will be deleted from Wikipedia, but this doesn't mean it can't be used anymore. You can embed an image uploaded to Commons like you would an image uploaded to Wikipedia, in this case:. Note that this is an automated message to inform you about the move. This bot did not copy the image itself. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 23:46, 30 September 2009 (UTC)

Some bogus polbot created redirects
Hi Quadell, I suppose I should mention User talk:Polbot, as it might have rolled off your watchlist. The first category of problem redirects (, etc.) appear to have been caused by an error interpreting the "&amp;#039;" encoding for the ' character, presumably with Polbot misinterpreting the # as a fragment separator. Notice that aside from messing up the title, the text of the redirect also contains that encoding. While wikimedia handles the redirect in that form, a plain ' would be friendlier to other editors, both human and otherwise. -- ToET 02:51, 1 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Quadell doesn't seem to be active right now... –Drilnoth (T • C • L) 21:51, 1 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Thanks. I could certainly WP:CSD at least the first group, but I don't think there is any rush and I figure that Quadell  would probably want to see them.  -- ToET 00:08, 2 October 2009 (UTC)

Your assistance please
The record shows you deleted File:F-6 tunnel.jpg back in 2007 -- as a replaceable fair use. User:Gerd 72, the contributor who uploaded this image uploaded about one hundred images of Albanian military installations or equipment, one or two at a time, over the last two and a half years. Most of the image they uploaded were deleted, in one fell swoop, about a month ago.

I looked at User:Gerd 72's talk page. I thought they offered a very credible explanation as to how they got access to that Albanian military installations and equipment.

I called the deletions alarming because it does not appear that anyone was willing to take the time to explain our policies. In particular I am alarmed because I found no experienced user explained to Gerd 72 as to how they could use the OTRS system to confidentially verify their bona fides.

I could see that a small minority of the images Gerd 72 uploaded were scans of previously published images. Many good faith uploaders make the mistake of thinking they possess intellectual property rights to scans of PD material. And I think it is likely that File:F-6 tunnel.jpg was one of those scans. But I'd like to confirm that. Would you mind taking a look at that image, and telling me if it was a scanned image, or an ordinary photo?

FWIW I wrote to the administrator who nominated all those images on August 30th. If I understood them correctly they are justifying not extending the assumption of good faith to Gerd 72 due to Gerd 72 appearing to use too many cameras to take the images.

Thanks! Geo Swan (talk) 11:19, 7 October 2009 (UTC)


 * These two also, if you wouldn't mind... File:US built boat Albanian Coast Guard.JPG, [[File:Army GAZ.JPG]]  Geo Swan (talk) 11:40, 7 October 2009 (UTC)

Image question
Based on User:Quadell/copyright, I assume that File:Motor Age cover 1912.jpg is actually PD. Can you review for me please? Cheers ww2censor (talk) 14:55, 8 October 2009 (UTC)

Celebrity image copyright question
Hi Quadell. Please could I ask your advice for a friend? My friend is not yet a member of Wikipedia but he would like to contribute to Wiki by adding a better picture of his relative, a celebrity. Of course he owns copyright to the image, but because the relative is a celebrity he does not want to allow free use of the image. The image can be put officially on the celebrity's own website by the webmaster (as source) if required, and if necessary with an appropriate statement added alongside it. I had thought that there would be a restricted-use licence somewhere on Wiki but cannot find it. Is there a solution to this problem? Thanks.--Storye book (talk) 18:04, 8 October 2009 (UTC)

Locally stored and protected high-risk images
Hi Quadell. On 9 May 2009 you deleted the high-risk File:Ambox style.png, with the deletion comment: "An identical copy exists on Wikimedia Commons". However, that doesn't work as you think, so it later caused some disruption, and potentially could have caused severe disruption. I have left a long message explaining why locally stored and protected high-risk images should not be deleted, see File talk:Ambox content.png.

I didn't notice your deletion until now, since I just like you are on a long wikibreak.

--David Göthberg (talk) 21:18, 22 October 2009 (UTC)

Wikipedia talk:WikiProject United States courts and judges
Thought you might like to express a preference in the great table format debate. bd2412 T 16:20, 29 October 2009 (UTC)

AfD nomination of List of things described as painted
An editor has nominated one or more articles which you have created or worked on, for deletion. The nominated article is List of things described as painted. We appreciate your contributions, but the nominator doesn't believe that the article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion and has explained why in his/her nomination (see also Notability and "What Wikipedia is not").

Your opinions on whether the article meets inclusion criteria and what should be done with the article are welcome; please participate in the discussion(s) by adding your comments to Articles for deletion/List of things described as painted. Please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes ( ~ ).

You may also edit the article during the discussion to improve it but should not remove the articles for deletion template from the top of the article; such removal will not end the deletion debate.

Please note: This is an automatic notification by a bot. I have nothing to do with this article or the deletion nomination, and can't do anything about it. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 01:04, 29 November 2009 (UTC)

Misleading Commons Category:Flora of Saint Pierre and Miquelon
Hi Quadell. The pictures in this category give the impression of a subtropical paradise, whereas Saint_Pierre_and_Miquelon says "The climate is damp and windy, and winters are harsh and long. Spring and early summer are foggy and cool. Late summer and early fall are sunny." I think there are about a dozen photos out of the 62 currently in the category that could be native to the islands, and therefore appropriate to the category. The rest are typical garden flora, some annual, some perennial, some summer bedding, very few of which could survive a winter in StP&M. I think the ones shown below stand a chance of being native flora. The rest should be moved, perhaps with help/advice from the original photographer, User:Neelix, as to which were taken in the wild. SiGarb | (Talk) 13:37, 1 December 2009 (UTC)

Thought you might want to comment...
...here. Cheers, –xenotalk 19:56, 9 December 2009 (UTC)

Building consensus on copyright issue
In 2007 you were involved in a discussion regarding the use of copyrighted architectural designs on Wikipedia pages and I'm trying to find community consensus on a gray area. If you can, please let me know at what point you feel these images should be replaced here. Thank you so much! DR04 (talk) 19:22, 11 December 2009 (UTC)

User:BD2412/200,000th edit party
You're invited! bd2412 T 03:58, 12 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Hey, bud - you seem to have disappeared. Everything ok? bd2412  T 15:26, 16 January 2010 (UTC)

Colima volcano aero.jpg
Hi,

We are trying to find out who is the original author of the file Commons:File:Colima volcano aero.jpg in order to promote a derivative work as a Valued Image. That file most probably originates from File:100_4106.JPG which has been later deleted by you. We are wondering if it is posible to see that deleted file page somehow and find out if the original photographer is mentioned there.

If you need more details, they can be found from here: Commons:User talk:MattiPaavola and User talk:Nc tech3.

thanks, Matti —Preceding unsigned comment added by MattiPaavola (talk • contribs) 10:23, 21 January 2010 (UTC)

Unreferenced BLPs
Hello Quadell! Thank you for your contributions. I am a bot alerting you that 6 of the articles that you created  are tagged as Unreferenced Biographies of Living Persons. 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 these articles up to standards, it would greatly help us with the current Category:All_unreferenced_BLPs article backlog. Once the articles are adequately referenced, please remove the unreferencedBLP tag. Here is the list:

Thanks!--DASHBot (talk) 08:09, 25 January 2010 (UTC)
 * 1) William Tremblay -
 * 2) Neil Asher Silberman -
 * 3) Nicholas de Lange -
 * 4) Karmenu Mifsud Bonnici -
 * 5) Arthur Marx -
 * 6) Mohammed Haydar Zammar -

Sysop help needed
Hi,

I need your help. When Magnus bot upload File:Smp kalmyk.gif on Commons, the name of the uplaoder was lost (probably a problem of UTF-8 / Unicode). Can you get the original name and put it on the Commons files ? Cdlt, V IGNERON * discut. 13:21, 5 February 2010 (UTC)

Mary Hood
Quadell, I'm not an administrator, but happy to help rename files. I was a novice at Wiki when I uploaded these files you marked for rename. Can I help, or must it be an administrator?

Too, I need your help! Another administrator is threating to delete the three images you marked for rename. These images have been up for over two years and multiple other admins. have looked at this page. I can change the data below these pics to match that of those of Gone With the Wind. Is this needed? Please advise?Carsonmc (talk) 20:40, 21 February 2010 (UTC)


 * Other books have as much or less info. See The Heart Is a Lonely Hunter. Carsonmc (talk) 20:44, 21 February 2010 (UTC)

About Nevada-tan's picture.
Hey, Quadell!

I had a question about Nevada-tan's picture....I was browsing the Nevada-tan discussion page when I came across a vote to put the killers photo on to the site....now the picture has been deleted..and I was wondering if the photo you saw was of a close-up face of Nevada-tan grinning..wearing purple? Or was it a class photo?

Thanks! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 198.188.7.120 (talk) 16:53, 2 March 2010 (UTC)

Commons de-adminship warning
Hi. Please see Commons:User talk:Quadell. Thanks! — Jeff G. ? 19:31, 9 March 2010 (UTC)

Question about image copyright at WP:MCQ
Hi, Quadell. I've raised a question about the licensing situation of File:View from National Cycle Network route 47 between Nelson and Hengoed in South Wales.JPG at Media copyright questions, and I thought you might be interested in the discussion because of the comments you made at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Template:GFDL-presumed. —Bkell (talk) 02:36, 7 April 2010 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Omaralbayoumi.jpg
 Thanks for uploading File:Omaralbayoumi.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

PLEASE NOTE:


 * I am a bot, and will therefore not be able to answer your questions.
 * I will remove the request for deletion if the file is used in an article once again.
 * If you receive this notice after the image is deleted, and you want to restore the image, click here to file an un-delete request.
 * To opt out of these bot messages, add  to your talk page.
 * If you believe the bot has made an error, please turn it off here and leave a message on my owner's talk page.

Thank you. DASHBot (talk) 00:23, 11 April 2010 (UTC)

Wiseman Nkuhlu
I'd like to recreate the article regarding Wiseman Nkuhlu. This article was however deleted by you on 28 February 2010 for WP:CP. Therefore I'd like to know if this was your only qualm and if I can thus proceed in recreating the article at some point in the future?Purple Duke (talk) 09:03, 15 April 2010 (UTC)

Talkback
??? ????? Od Mishehu 12:56, 21 April 2010 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion of Template:AbuGhraibPic
Template:AbuGhraibPic has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Thank you. Plastikspork ?Œ (talk) 21:29, 24 April 2010 (UTC)

FAR for Ziad Jarrah
nominated Ziad Jarrah for a featured article review here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets featured article criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. If substantial concerns are not addressed during the review period, the article will be moved to the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Remove" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here.  YellowMonkey  ( vote in the Southern Stars and White Ferns supermodel photo poll )  01:16, 3 May 2010 (UTC)

Ping
I've emailed you. Tony  (talk)  05:28, 12 May 2010 (UTC)

Visiting
Are you back, just visiting, on a long break or retired? ww2censor (talk) 15:15, 21 May 2010 (UTC)
 * I only visit sporadically. – Quadell (talk) 13:06, 4 June 2010 (UTC)

Featured article review Ziad Jarrah
Hi Quadell, there is discussion here, Featured article review/Ziad Jarrah/archive2 Tom B (talk) 13:15, 29 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Thanks for letting me know. I probably won't mess with it, but I hope it improves enough to pass muster. – Quadell (talk) 00:44, 12 July 2010 (UTC)

An old deletion
Hi, can you check to see if File:Porthcurno beach0001.JPG had licensing information? You deleted it as a duplicate, but then the filw of which it was a duplicate was deleted for having no licence. So, if this one did have a licence, could it then be restored? DuncanHill (talk) 10:04, 4 June 2010 (UTC)


 * The file was uploaded by User:Rwimages on December 8, 2007. The summary was "rwimages Porthcurno Beach.", and the license given was PD-self. I believe any administrator can restore this image. – Quadell (talk) 13:04, 4 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Thanks, could you restore it please? May be of use. DuncanHill (talk) 13:08, 4 June 2010 (UTC)


 * Many thanks for your help and the restoration. DuncanHill (talk) 20:22, 8 June 2010 (UTC)

Revision to Sid Meier's Alien Crossfire and Sid Meier's Alpha Centauri articles
I noticed that you have revised either Sid Meier's Alpha Centauri or Sid Meier's Alien Crossfire.

I intend to revise those articles following the WikiProject Video games/Article guidelines. There are more details on the discussion pages of those articles. I'd be interested in any comments you have. It would be best if your comments were on the discussion pages of the two articles.

Thank you.

Vyeh (talk) 18:42, 8 June 2010 (UTC)

Daniel Ellsberg -- WP:FRINGE + plagiarism issue -> fact-tagging
Thanks for getting the Daniel Ellsberg BLP really going, back in 2004 (and for all your great work since then -- your record of edits is impressive). I'd like to get your help with the upshot of a certain comedy of errors in that bio: your words from back then were plagiarized by a spam-site, then some of the sentences got fact-tagged, then somebody cited that Wikipedia-plagiarizing spam site as if it were an RS (perhaps not noticing the wording he relied on was identical to yours) and then he changed your wording from something plausibly supportable to something downright paranoid. Follow all that? You can't make this stuff up. Anyway, all amusement aside: there's still the issue of fact-tagging. See the discussion on the Talk page. Your assistance in backing up your own words from 2004 would be greatly appreciated. Yakushima (talk) 05:32, 2 July 2010 (UTC)


 * Wow, that's been a while! I read Ellsberg's biography a while back, and tried to improve that article. I hate it when other sites plagiarize Wikipedia, and then it looks like we plagiarized them. It doesn't happen all that often, but it's irritating. I'll look at the article when I get a minute, but I don't edit all that often anymore. – Quadell (talk) 00:56, 12 July 2010 (UTC)

Questions about Polbot
Hello, I'm a biology/herpetology writer on fr.wikipedia, and also a bot operator. I found an article (Wright's Skink) which was generated by your bot. I can see from the summary that you generate the article from the IUCN list (in this example this link). I have some questions, if you are all right to share: Regards, Hexasoft (talk) 20:47, 4 July 2010 (UTC)
 * how do you extract complete author name from the familly name? I guess en: have a zoologists names page, do you use it?
 * how do you get the classification (for taxobox)? Of course classification is shown on IUCN page, but not as complete as the one used on taxobox as far as I can see.


 * Greetings. IUCN just has the author's last name, sometimes abbreviated. I wrote a jerry-rigged script to translate those into full names with links, but it never was 100% accurate... so if you ever find a source that contradicts Polbot, assume your source is correct and Polbot's is mistaken. I just get classification from the IUCN page, e.g. http://www.iucnredlist.org/apps/redlist/details/41985/0 has kingdom, phylum, class, etc. – Quadell (talk) 00:56, 12 July 2010 (UTC)

Quadell creating pageant articles?
Yikes, that's a username from my distant Wikipedian past! In fact, so far distant I can't even remember where you were placed in that little fracas but I just had to come and wave hi! PageantUpdater talk • contribs  23:19, 9 July 2010 (UTC)


 * Hi, Pageant! :) Yeah, I don't really focus on pageant articles, but I'm friends with Claire Buffie's sister, and I'm really impressed with her platform and her history. So I thought I'd help make the article. I contacted Claire, and she's already given me some additional information and corrections, which I'm about to fix.
 * So how have you been? – Quadell (talk) 00:40, 12 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Oops, only just saw your reply! I've been good, took a mega break myself for most of 09... did me good :)  No more arguments with people, thank heavens ;) lol. Claire is great, and I love her history, runner-up to Katie Stam, and her bridesmaid!  I was so thrilled to find out she'd won Miss NY. PageantUpdater  talk • contribs  01:25, 23 July 2010 (UTC)
 * ...and in follow-up news Katie Stam is getting married in just a few hours from now! (Claire's in the wedding.) – Quadell (talk) 17:27, 23 July 2010 (UTC)

Welcome back!
Welcome back, evil creator of paradoxes. Jayjg (talk) 00:32, 13 July 2010 (UTC)
 * [[Image:Emblem-extra-cool.svg|25px]] – Quadell (talk) 12:43, 13 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Hey, long time no see! Good to see you're around again. :-) Fut.Perf. ¤ 16:03, 22 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Thanks! – Quadell (talk) 17:27, 23 July 2010 (UTC)
 * (thumbs up) bd2412  T 17:47, 23 July 2010 (UTC)

Requests for comment/Naming conventions for United States federal buildings
Greetings! I'm looking for additional input in this discussion - please comment if you have an opinion. Cheers! bd2412 T 02:45, 2 August 2010 (UTC)

Template:Non-free unsure has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Thank you. —Justin (koavf)?T?C?M? 01:41, 16 August 2010 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Giulio Mazzarini


The article Giulio Mazzarini has been proposed for deletion because under Wikipedia policy, all biographies of living persons created after March 18, 2010, must have at least one source that directly supports material in the article. &#32; The nominator also raised the following concern:
 * Doesn't seem to adhere to Wikipedia basic NPOV and notability requirements. No reliable sources either.

If you created the article, please don't take offense. Instead, consider improving the article. For help on inserting references, see Referencing for beginners or ask at Help desk. Once you have provided at least one reliable source, you may remove the prod blp tag. Please do not remove the tag unless the article is sourced. If you cannot provide such a source within ten days, the article may be deleted, but you can when you are ready to add one. Batman70xx (talk) 11:04, 21 September 2010 (UTC)

Polbot
I've noticed that a lot of articles created by your bot, User:Polbot, are stubs that meet A1. They don't explain the subject well enough to be useful. They also do not explain how the subject of the article is important. Nobody finds the articles to improve them because the articles are not really important enough to have links from any other articles. I recently tagged one of these articles for deletion, Giant Musk Turtle. It doesn't explain the history of the turtle or, pretty much, anything else. I think that it might be a good idea if you made Polbot link other articles to the created article right after he created the article.  Mr. R00t   Talk  21:27, 28 September 2010 (UTC)


 * I think it's insane to suggest that the Giant Musk Turtle is not important enough to have an encyclopedia article. – Quadell (talk) 17:27, 29 September 2010 (UTC)