If the external website belongs to you, and you want to allow Wikipedia to use the text — which means allowing other people to modify it — then you must verify that externally by one of the processes explained at Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials . If you are not the owner of the external website but have permission from that owner, see Wikipedia:Requesting copyright permission . You might want to look at Wikipedia's policies and guidelines for more details, or ask a question here .
If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon }}
to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. - 2/0 (cont. ) 15:22, 16 October 2009 (UTC)[ reply ]
In the future please refrain from posting inflammatory links which serve no purpose towards furthering the creation of an encyclopedia. Wikipedia is not a discussion board.
Thanks...Earthdirt (talk ) 16:47, 28 October 2009 (UTC)[ reply ]
Well, what ecology is correct. There was global cooling thirty years ago, because of human activity. Today, there's global warming, also because of human activity. And what does interaction of organisms with each other and with the non-living environment, has with Greenpeace and WWF? Agre22 (talk ) 13:14, 29 October 2009 (UTC)agre22[ reply ]
Article Wizard
.
If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon }}
to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the page does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that they userfy the page or have a copy emailed to you. Ironholds (talk ) 20:43, 3 November 2009 (UTC)[ reply ]
The article
because of the following concern:
Non-notable book by non-notable author.
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 {{the article's talk page
.
Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{]
Article talk pages, such as the one that you commented on for Women in the military , are meant to be discussions for how to improve the articles, not general forums about the subject of the article. Please keep your comments on article talk pages centered upon the articles themselves and how to improve them in the future. Thank you. Asarelah (talk ) 01:09, 23 November 2009 (UTC)[ reply ]
The article Paul H. Lewis has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:
Fails WP:Notability (academics)
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 {{.
Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{]
Status and Advice
Please see my talk page at [2] for what needs to be added to the article, just to start off with. I removed the prod as reviewing administrator, but now you should put in the details. Any librarian can help you find book reviews, but some of them are usually in google scholar.
I see in general you have been writing extremely brief articles. some of the ones that have been deleted or marked for deletion might well have had no trouble if you had written them more fully. I'd suggest a re-reading of WP:BIO and
our guide to writing Wikipedia articles. There is also the fuller discussion in chapter 6 of
the free online version of
How Wikipedia Works by Phoebe Ayers, Charles Matthews, and Ben Yates (also available in
print )
DGG (
talk ) 01:20, 14 December 2009 (UTC)
[ reply ]
Please stop adding comments on the talk pages of Eva Perón and Isabel Perón labeling them as "prostitutes". Beyond being unverifiable information, that can be considered defamatory by both their political supporters and by Isabel herself if it comes to that.
talk) 19:30, 13 December 2009 (UTC)
[ reply ]
Article's talk pages are used for discussing the article and how to improve it. External links can be used as references to explain somethings that you may desire to add to the article, but not if the sole purpose of a thread is to say "hey, there a page about this here". Instead of just providing the link, explain what is there in the link and what do you propose to do with the article about it.
talk) 21:42, 13 December 2009 (UTC)
[ reply ]
Category:Left-wing organisations of Brazil
I have proposed that Category:Left-wing organisations of Brazil , which you created, should be either deleted or renamed. Your comments would be welcome in the discussion at Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2009 December 23#Category:Left-wing_organisations_of_Brazil . --Brown HairedGirl (talk) • (contribs )
You might want to check out
]
Please, do not erase comments made by other editors (including non-registered) again. It's not up to you to judge if they are false or wrong and anyyone has the right to share its thoughts. If you don't like it, complain with an administrator, but do not erase it. Regards, --Lecen (talk ) 18:34, 8 January 2010 (UTC)[ reply ]
Just a quick note: You might want to check out WP:Citing sources , as I noticed you used a non-standard method of citing the sources in the Thomas John Gerrard article. I highly recommend using the <ref> and </ref> tags. Regards, PDCook (talk ) 18:38, 10 January 2010 (UTC)[ reply ]
Also, I'm not sure how this reference confirms that the subject was a priest. PDCook (talk ) 18:41, 10 January 2010 (UTC)[ reply ]
OK the new reference looks better, but can you please cite it properly per WP:Citing sources ? If you don't know how, you can mimic the way I did with the other citations in the article. Regards, PDCook (talk ) 19:18, 10 January 2010 (UTC)[ reply ]
Greetings again. I would like to point out that book titles should be italicized. Furthermore, the book itself is not considered a valid reference and thus this article is currently unreferenced. Regards, PDCook (talk ) 22:37, 10 January 2010 (UTC)[ reply ]
Those references still aren't independent. I also really wish you would read and understand WP:MOS and
WP:Citing sources , but you seem resistant to my suggestions. I guess other people will have to continue to clean up your articles.
PDCook (
talk ) 21:14, 11 January 2010 (UTC)
[ reply ]
For example, in the Guerrillas and Generals article, a book review is referenced that at least indicates some degree of notability of the work. Regards, PDCook (talk ) 21:21, 11 January 2010 (UTC)[ reply ]
Welcome to Wikipedia! I am glad to see you are interested in discussing a topic. However, as a general rule , talk pages such as Talk:Vegetarianism are for discussion related to improving the article, not general discussion about the topic. If you have specific questions about certain topics, consider visiting our reference desk and asking them there instead of on article talk pages. Thank you. -kotra (talk ) 17:55, 12 January 2010 (UTC)[ reply ]
This is another article you created that needs references. Please add independent reliable sources . PDCook (talk ) 02:28, 13 January 2010 (UTC)[ reply ]
Also Woman and the New Race. Be careful to properly capitalize book titles.
PDCook (
talk ) 02:33, 13 January 2010 (UTC)
[ reply ]
This is an improper use of a talk page. The talk page is there to discuss improvements to the article, not advertise various topics. Please cease misusing talk pages or someone will surely bring this to
]
As other editors have said, please don't use talk pages for general chat about a subject .
McGeddon (
talk ) 23:37, 14 January 2010 (UTC)
[ reply ]
Time to ban this guy again??? [3] Who wants to start the ANI? Ryan 4314 (talk ) 15:41, 15 January 2010 (UTC)[ reply ]
Please the book
]
I'm not doubting this, but you need to provide independent sources that demonstrate original research, since you only provide the book itself as a reference. Please be aware of WP policies, as many people are getting upset about your edits and further action could be taken. Regards,
PDCook (
talk ) 20:28, 15 January 2010 (UTC)
[ reply ]
You have been
blocked from editing for a period of
2 weeks for
Return to continued tendentious editing - despite previous block for similar edits - your next edits of a similar nature will result in an indefinite block. . Please stop. You are welcome to
make useful contributions after the block expires. If you believe this block is unjustified you may
contest this block by adding the text
{{unblock |Your reason here}}
below. --
VirtualSteve need admin support? 20:32, 15 January 2010 (UTC)
[ reply ]
You were unfair with me.Agre22 (talk ) 00:48, 16 January 2010 (UTC)agre22[ reply ]
See
]
I went to see this site: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Military_Pay Agre22 (talk ) 14:14, 20 January 2010 (UTC)agre22[ reply ]
The article Morris Steggerda has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:
Non-notable
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 {{.
Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{]
The article The Blood of the Nation has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:
Non-notable, no 3rd party refs
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 {{.
Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{]
Article Wizard
.
If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon }}
to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the page does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that they userfy the page or have a copy emailed to you. iBen talk /contribs If you reply here, please place a talkback notification on my page. 20:19, 31 January 2010 (UTC)[ reply ]
You have been
blocked indefinitely from editing for
continued tendentious editing - you have returned to editing for the express purpose of adding point of view comments and original research in a number of articles - despite reasonable warnings to desist . If you believe this block is unjustified, you may
contest this block by adding the text
{{unblock |Your reason here}}
below, but you should read our
guide to appealing blocks first. --
VirtualSteve need admin support? 23:05, 31 January 2010 (UTC)
[ reply ]
I have received your immediate email (and the previous one) in regards to your being blocked again. I choose not to return by email to you because of the way you have chosen to put your comments and questions to me via that medium. You have been given ample warnings to not return to wikipedia as a point of view warrior - especially in regards to posting original research into talk pages - across multiple articles. This is a community encyclopaedia that requires balanced information to be posted by editors; and disruption of that process by yourself - especially after 3 previous blocks - does not lend itself to achievement of such an objective.--VirtualSteve need admin support? 23:14, 31 January 2010 (UTC)[ reply ]
Sir, please pay attention to my messages. I am not prepared to discuss this matter with you via email - as detailed above. Your continued attempts to do so have now also been blocked. As an editor you are entitled to place an unblock claim and another administrator will consider your request - unblocking will not occur if you simply send me emails that are critical and somewhat rude. I do not lightly take the action of blocking editors indefinitely - and only do so if, for the good of the community and the project, there appears to be no other way to handle the situation. Such a conclusion usually occurs after a number of shorter blocks - and especially so when the editor in question simply returns to previous editing patterns upon return of a shorter block. That is the case that your edits present to the community at this time. --VirtualSteve need admin support? 23:27, 31 January 2010 (UTC)[ reply ]
Then, how can I have a contact with another administrator?Agre22 (talk ) 23:29, 31 January 2010 (UTC)agre22[ reply ]
Please see the template that I have previously placed upon your page in relation to this block. You will note that there is a section giving instructions with regards appealing a block. Follow those instructions - and an administrator will come to your page in due course.--VirtualSteve need admin support? 23:47, 31 January 2010 (UTC)[ reply ]
The problem remains. I went to many pages of administrators and I didn't found any e-mail to send a message. What I can do?Agre22 (talk ) 10:31, 1 February 2010 (UTC)agre22[ reply ]
You don't need to send an email to anybody to ask for your block to be reviewed. This can simply be done, as the block message states, by placing {{unblock|your reason here}} right here on your talk page, removing "your reason here" and stating the reasons you feel you should be unblocked. According to Wikipedia policy the review will then be conducted by a neutral administrator. It is recommended that you read Wikipedia:Guide to appealing blocks first before doing this. Orderinchaos 07:21, 2 February 2010 (UTC)[ reply ]
I found my password writen in a book yesterday. Even so, I remains blocked. I did dozens of articles for wikipedia. For what?Agre22 (talk ) 13:34, 8 February 2010 (UTC)agre22[ reply ]
The article
because of the following concern:
Non-notable, unreferenced
The article Thomas John Gerrard has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:
Non-notable
The article Silas Malafaia has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:
Non-notable
The article Luiz Carlos Alborghetti has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:
Unreferenced
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 {{dated prod}} 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 {{]
I can't do nothing with these articles. I remains blocked.Agre22 (talk ) 13:27, 8 February 2010 (UTC)agre22[ reply ]
The article
because of the following concern:
Redundant to Estevam Hernandes , no assertion of independent notability
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 {{.
Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{]
I can't do nothing, because I'm blocked forever.Agre22 (talk ) 12:32, 13 February 2010 (UTC)agre22[ reply ]
The talk about
USS Maine (ACR-1) is very weak, but I can't do nothing.
Agre22 (
talk ) 17:05, 16 February 2010 (UTC)agre22
[ reply ]
Why don't you post your thoughts here, maybe someone will stumble across and read them. Ryan 4314 (talk ) 18:02, 16 February 2010 (UTC)[ reply ]
You just wrote an answer. You just wrote a joke.Agre22 (talk ) 18:15, 16 February 2010 (UTC)agre22[ reply ]
The article
because of the following concern:
This page is almost completely unmaintained (only six edits in the six months since its original author was indefinitely blocked from editing Wikipedia), almost completely unlinked (only from Eugenics and Margaret Sanger ), completely unreferenced (and unlikely to be referenced in the future; I can't find any articles about the book), and almost completely unread (stats.grok.se says it was viewed about three or four times a day last month). The original author of this article appears to have written it as a way to push their POV that Margaret Sanger was evil. As a result of these circumstances, the article is of very poor quality; aside from its grammatical errors, before my recent edit, it entirely failed to mention the main subject of the book it's ostensibly written about, which is birth control (or, as Sanger wrote, Birth Control.) Given the non-notability of the book, as manifested by all of these circumstances and by the fact that the book has only four reviews on Amazon despite having been published 88 years ago, it is very unlikely that anyone will ever take the trouble to bring this article up to Wikipedia standards.
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 {{.
Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{]
I found this article: English . Was this site the source that you found to write the article about João do Amaral Gurgel ? Gram78 (talk ) 17:21, 20 October 2010 (UTC)Gram78[ reply ]
Well, I'm a Brazilian and the article English is correct, but it wasn't my source to write my article about João do Amaral Gurgel . Agre22 (talk ) 19:54, 24 November 2010 (UTC)agre22[ reply ]
Talk:Dalkon Shield
Hello, Agre22. You have new messages at
Talk:Dalkon Shield .
Message added 02:46, 15 January 2012 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
The article Estevam Hernandes has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:
This article does not follow WP biography notability guidelines. In addition, there is poor referencing and sources, and lack of information on this person to constitute a Wiki page.
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 {{proposed deletion/dated}}
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 {{proposed deletion/dated}}
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. Tseung Kwan O (talk ) 11:06, 5 July 2016 (UTC)[ reply ]
hi , billcat bias attacking me , i corrected a link also removing useless offensive reply by a 172.193
- ~ MetAlOx — Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.53.172.65 (talk ) 10:42, 18 December 2017 (UTC) [ reply ]
The article
because of the following concern:
No assertion of notability, no references.
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 {{proposed deletion/dated}}
notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page .
Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}}
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. ―Justin (koa vf ) ❤T ☮C ☺M ☯ 00:34, 4 May 2018 (UTC)[ reply ]
If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read
the guide to writing your first article.
You may want to consider using the Article Wizard
to help you create articles.
A tag has been placed on Grupo Inconfidência 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 person, a group of people, an individual animal, an organization (band, club, company, etc.), web content, or an organized event that does not credibly 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 read more about what is generally accepted as notable .
If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines . If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator . Drm310 🍁 (talk ) 02:29, 16 November 2018 (UTC)[ reply ]
The article Extra Alagoas has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:
A periodical that does not appear to pass the
WP:GNG
. The only source in the article is the official website (which appears to possibly be defunct). Searching for sources only brought up a few mentions of the paper, but no actual significant coverage.
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 {{proposed deletion/dated}}
notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page .
Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}}
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. Rorshacma (talk ) 17:31, 31 October 2023 (UTC)[ reply ]