User talk:Serpent's Choice

AfD closures
I am concerned about some recent non-admin speedy closures of AfDs that you have made. The most striking example I have seen so far is Articles for deletion/Tony Berg, which you closed with the comment "Nominated article is unrelated to the problematic content now removed from Eureka, California. As a result, there is no deletion rationale for this article, although the nomination was clearly made in good faith." However, the nomination contained "Following the link to the Tony Berg page that the anonymous editor linked to his/her edit, I found nothing of notability and was unable to verify the information on the page", which is a perfectly valid deletion rationale. The fact that the nominator also mentioned irrelevant information in another article does not in any way detract from that rationale. Likewise you closed Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Camp Lazlo: Where's Lazlo? with the comment "nominator did not advance a reason for deletion". However, the nominator certainly did advance a reason for deletion, namely lack of sourcing. Speedy closure criterion 1 is for a nomination in which no reason for deletion is given at all, not for cases where you think the reason is insufficient. You went on to say "Although this article could -- and should -- probably be more tightly written and more comprehensively cited, those are editorial issues, not causes for deletion. The Emmy Award is sufficient to meet notability requirements, and, indeed, all such recipients have articles." That is a reason for you to support "keep" in the discussion, not a reason for summarily closing the discussion without giving anyone else a chance to comment. AfD discussion should almost always be allowed to run for a full week, and non-admin speedy closure should take place only in very exceptional circumstances, where the nomination was clearly totally inappropriate. In particular, please read the examples given at number 1 in Speedy keep. You will see that those examples are ones where the nominator does not actually say that the article should be deleted at all, not cases where the nominator says that the article should be deleted but gives a reason which someone else does not regard as adequate. (The examples are "only proposing a non-deletion action such as moving or merging" and "posting a nomination in response to a proposed deletion but advocating a keep position".) JamesBWatson (talk) 11:49, 3 June 2011 (UTC)
 * I concur. See also notice about DRV on System bus model below. Ipsign (talk) 15:25, 3 June 2011 (UTC)

Deletion review for System bus model
An editor has asked for a deletion review of System bus model. Because you closed the deletion discussion for this page, speedily deleted it, or otherwise were interested in the page, you might want to participate in the deletion review. Ipsign (talk) 15:25, 3 June 2011 (UTC)

BLP discussion
Hi there. I've started a discussion about one of your old subpages (User:Serpent's Choice/Sandbox/Review) at Biographies of living persons/Noticeboard. It dates back to 2007 so you might not even want to be part of the discussions, or you might be passionate about it still - any contribution you have would be good. I raised it there because I wanted to avoid retreading old ground about this (by merely removing/restoring it) and it's an interesting situation. violet/riga [talk] 19:24, 3 August 2011 (UTC)

Articles for deletion/Alexander Henderson Award (2nd nomination)
In a revisit of a previous AFD you commented on, you might be interested in Articles for deletion/Alexander Henderson Award (2nd nomination).--GrapedApe (talk) 03:32, 19 December 2011 (UTC)

Information
I noticed your username commenting at an Arbcom discussion regarding civility. An effort is underway that would likely benifit if your views were included. I hope you will append regards at: Requests for comment/Civility enforcement/Questionnaire Thank you for considering this request. My 76 Strat  (talk) 09:26, 29 November 2012 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!
MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:06, 23 November 2015 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Crossgen Chronicles promo poster.jpg
Thanks for uploading File:Crossgen Chronicles promo poster.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 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).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:15, 17 June 2018 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of File:Trafficinsoulsposter.jpg


The file File:Trafficinsoulsposter.jpg has been proposed for deletion&#32;because of the following concern: "unused, low-res, no obvious use"

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages 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 file's talk page.

Please consider addressing 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 files for discussion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion.

This bot DID NOT nominate any file(s) for deletion; please refer to the page history of each individual file for details. Thanks, FastilyBot (talk) 01:01, 28 July 2019 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:BoVDOldCover.jpg
Thanks for uploading File:BoVDOldCover.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 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).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:25, 4 September 2019 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:UnearthedOld.jpg
Thanks for uploading File:UnearthedOld.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 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).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 19:29, 27 January 2023 (UTC)