User talk:Vimoral2

Nomination of Crown Pop for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Crown Pop 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/Crown Pop 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. ---  DOOMSDAYER 520 (Talk&#124;Contribs) 21:05, 6 December 2018 (UTC)

Nomination of Amefurasshi for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Amefurasshi 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/Amefurasshi 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. Hitro talk 16:06, 8 December 2018 (UTC)

WP:BLP
Please don’t readd the birth years to Denpagumi.inc without a reliable source. The source attached to the table did not mention them. FoxyGrampa75 (talk) 02:39, 4 July 2019 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of B.O.L.T
Hello Vimoral2,

I wanted to let you know that I just tagged B.O.L.T for deletion, because the article doesn't clearly indicate why the subject is important enough to be included in an encyclopedia.

If you feel that the article shouldn't be deleted and want more time to work on it, you can [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=&action=edit&section=new&preload=Template:Hangon_preload&preloadtitle=This+page+should+not+be+speedy+deleted+because...+ contest this deletion], but don't remove the speedy deletion tag from the top.

You can leave a note on my talk page if you have questions. Thanks!

Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.

 scope_creep Talk  22:21, 17 October 2019 (UTC)

Deletion discussion about Stardust Planet
Hello, Vimoral2

Welcome to Wikipedia! I edit here too, under the username Scope creep and it's nice to meet you :-)

I wanted to let you know that I've started a discussion about whether an article that you created, Stardust Planet, should be deleted. Your comments are welcome at Articles for deletion/Stardust Planet.

You might like to note that such discussions usually run for seven days and are not ballot-polls. And, our guide about effectively contributing to such discussions is worth a read. Last but not least, you are highly encouraged to continue improving the article; just be sure not to remove the tag about the deletion nomination from the top.

If you have any questions, please leave a comment here and prepend it with. And, don't forget to sign your reply with. Thanks!

(Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

 scope_creep Talk  11:43, 25 December 2019 (UTC)

B.O.L.T moved to draftspace
An article you recently created, B.O.L.T, does not have enough sources and citations as written to remain published. It needs more citations from reliable, independent sources. (?) Information that can't be referenced should be removed (verifiability is of central importance on Wikipedia). I've moved your draft to draftspace (with a prefix of " " before the article title) where you can incubate the article with minimal disruption. When you feel the article meets Wikipedia's general notability guideline and thus is ready for mainspace, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page.  scope_creep Talk  08:58, 31 May 2020 (UTC)

AfC notification: Draft:B.O.L.T has a new comment
 I've left a comment on your Articles for Creation submission, which can be viewed at Draft:B.O.L.T. Thanks!  scope_creep Talk  08:59, 31 May 2020 (UTC)

I have sent you a note about a page you started
Hello, Vimoral2

Thank you for creating B.O.L.T.

User:North8000, while examining this page as a part of our page curation process, had the following comments:

To reply, leave a comment here and prepend it with. And, don't forget to sign your reply with ~.

(Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

North8000 (talk) 01:19, 30 July 2020 (UTC)

December 2020
You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war&#32; according to the reverts you have made on Amefurasshi; that means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be, when you have seen that other editors disagree. Users are expected to collaborate with others, to avoid editing disruptively, and to try to reach a consensus, rather than repeatedly undoing other users' edits once it is known that there is a disagreement.

Points to note: If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes and work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If you engage in an edit war, you may be blocked from editing. --John B123 (talk) 10:44, 31 December 2020 (UTC)
 * 1) Edit warring is disruptive regardless of how many reverts you have made;
 * 2) Do not edit war even if you believe you are right.

I was explaining to you the reasons why the has obtained major notability on the last 2 years on your talk page John B123, but I didn't get an answer --Vimoral2 (talk) 14:25, 27 January 2021 (UTC)


 * Apologies, I must have missed that. I have asked for another reviewer to have a look. Regards. --John B123 (talk) 16:39, 27 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Another reviewer has had a look. Their opinion was that your version was poorly sourced and eligible for deletion per WP:G4. However the charting single would go someway towards meeting WP:NBAND if a suitable citation was added. If you want to develop the article by adding further references then that's fine. I would suggest you add the in use template whilst you are working on it to advise others you are still working on it. Regards. --John B123 (talk) 17:16, 27 January 2021 (UTC)