User talk:Mindraker

David, I'm really sorry about all this. I know how intelligent that you are, and how much of an asset that you could be to Wikipedia. It's my sincere hope that this is all just some big misunderstanding. Please, if you have any questions, please feel free to ask. You can reply here, and I will keep an eye out for anything that you say. Best wishes, Elonka 23:51, 16 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

"Nuts!" -- General Anthony McAuliffe — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mindraker (talk • contribs) 20:50, December 17, 2007

I wonder if this is notable? See talk. Thanks, --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk} 02:27, 22 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You have been accused of

• If you have permission from the author to release the text under the
  Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License (CC-BY-SA), leave a message explaining the details at Talk:Odynorgasmia and send an email with confirmation of permission to "permissions-en (at) wikimedia (dot) org". Make sure you quote the exact page name, Odynorgasmia, in your email. See Wikipedia:Requesting copyright permission
  for instructions.
• If a note on the original website states that re-use is permitted "under the
  Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License (CC-BY-SA), version 3.0, or that the material is released into the public domain leave a note at Talk:Odynorgasmia
  with a link to where we can find that note.
• If you own the copyright to the material: send an e-mail from an address associated with the original publication to permissions-en(at)wikimedia(dot)org or a postal message to the
  GNU Free Documentation License, and note that you have done so on Talk:Odynorgasmia. See Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials
  for instructions.

If you would like to begin working on a new version of the article you may do so at this temporary page. Leave a note at Talk:Odynorgasmia saying you have done so and an administrator will move the new article into place once the issue is resolved. Thank you, and please feel welcome to continue contributing to Wikipedia. Happy editing!   —Chris Capoccia ^T⁄_C 15:32, 10 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect

The article Coitus à unda has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Not in source, single source. The "á unda" here is just a play on "under"'; User:Eubot in its indwidom has managed to make "Coitus a unda" out of it, thus mixing three languages in three words. It's bollox, it doesn't give any information to readers, just delete it.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be

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. Si Trew (talk) 16:12, 27 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The article Jyamrung Dada has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Under this English transliteration of the name, I can't find any reliable sources to verify that this hill exists, let alone anything about it. It isn't on the Geonet database, and there's nothing reliable anywhere else. There's no indication of what the Nepali name of this hill is, so I can't search in Nepali.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be

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. ♠PMC♠ (talk) 22:39, 25 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The article U-TDOA has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

original research

, reads like an advertisement, notability not established, created by blocked sockpuppeteer

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be

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. ~ ToBeFree (talk) 15:18, 29 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]