User talk:Mmhuang/Archive 4

If you have uploaded other non-free media, consider checking that you have specified the non-free rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'file' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the file is already gone, you can still make a request for undeletion and ask for a chance to fix the problem. If you have any questions, please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. -- Marchjuly (talk) 00:49, 29 September 2016 (UTC)

The discussion about the new intricate Filipino Nav box is still waiting for your response, this is your second notification. --Osplace 19:52, 3 October 2016 (UTC)

You have been found the creator and spreader of the new intricate Filipino Nav box. We have been trying to discuss this matter with you, but so far you have refused to participate. This is your last warning. --Osplace 15:14, 5 October 2016 (UTC)

Stop reverting the speedy deletion nomination in

You are not behaving nicely going against the Wikipedia Policies, like your second revert done here. You have been warned twice, you might be blocked per

WP:3RR. --Osplace

02:28, 17 October 2016 (UTC)

12:11, 16 October 2016 (UTC)

Mecaila Irish May Morada

22:47, 17 October 2016 (UTC)

Dawn Nicole Macandili

Hello Mmhuang. Thanks for patrolling new pages – it's a very important task! I'm just letting you know, however, that there is consensus that we shouldn't tag pages as lacking context (CSD A1) and/or content (CSD A3) moments after they are created, as you did at Police Roll of Honour Trust. It is also suggested that pages that might meet CSD A7 criteria not be tagged for deletion immediately after they are created. It's usually best to wait at least 10–15 minutes for more content to be added if the page is very short, and the articles should not be marked as patrolled. Tagging such pages in a very short space of time may drive away well-meaning contributors, which is not good for Wikipedia. Attack pages (G10), blatant nonsense (G1), copyright violations (G12) and pure vandalism/blatant hoaxes (G3) should of course be tagged and deleted immediately. Thanks. Adam9007 (talk) 00:07, 20 October 2016 (UTC)

Ok. Thanks for informing about this. I hope to be better next time. --Mmhuang (talk)

Hello. At Jayne Furlong you added the refimprove tag a couple of days ago. I worked to improve the references and the way they were cited. Would you kindly inspect the results of my work and remove the tag if it now meets your expectations. Thank you. Akld guy (talk) 06:06, 23 October 2016 (UTC)

Hello. Have you overlooked my request? Akld guy (talk) 20:52, 24 October 2016 (UTC)

Publicly thanked but now expressing thanks here too. Akld guy (talk) 05:36, 25 October 2016 (UTC)

Template:Zambales/color has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Frietjes (talk) 13:46, 26 October 2016 (UTC)

The article 2015 Cignal HD Spikers season has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Fails

WP:NSEASONS

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. Osplace 04:13, 27 October 2016 (UTC)

The article Foton Tornadoes 2015 has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Fails

WP:NSEASONS

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. Osplace 04:17, 27 October 2016 (UTC)

The article Generika Lifesavers 2014 has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Fails

WP:NSEASONS

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. Osplace 04:20, 27 October 2016 (UTC)

The article Generika Lifesavers 2016 has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Fails

WP:NSEASONS

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. Osplace 04:21, 27 October 2016 (UTC)

The article 2013 Petron Blaze Spikers season has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Fails

WP:NSEASONS

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. Osplace 04:25, 27 October 2016 (UTC)

The article 2014 Petron Blaze Spikers season has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Fails

WP:NSEASONS

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. Osplace 04:25, 27 October 2016 (UTC)

The article 2015 Petron Blaze Spikers season has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Fails

WP:NSEASONS

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. Osplace 04:25, 27 October 2016 (UTC)

The article 2016 Amy's Kitchen-Perpetual season has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Fails

WP:NSEASONS

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. Osplace 04:26, 27 October 2016 (UTC)

The article PLDT Home Ultera Ultra Fast Hitters 2015 has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Fails

WP:NSEASONS

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. Osplace 04:34, 27 October 2016 (UTC)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by MatthewVanitas was:

This submission appears to

independent, reliable, published sources, not just to materials produced by the creator of the subject being discussed. This is important so that the article can meet Wikipedia's verifiability policy and the notability

of the subject can be established. If you still feel that this subject is worthy of inclusion in Wikipedia, please rewrite your submission to comply with these policies.

Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit when they have been resolved.

• If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Kristopher Keating and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
• If you need any assistance, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk or on the reviewer's talk page.
• You can also use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

MatthewVanitas (talk) 22:32, 27 October 2016 (UTC)

Hi. It was made known to me that a recent of yours to your user page added, perhaps inadvertently, some categories that would suggest you are an administrator when, in fact, you are not. Could you please remove them? Thanks. Daniel Case (talk) 15:49, 31 October 2016 (UTC)

I've done it, I assume you just didn't notice them. Doug Weller talk 18:51, 31 October 2016 (UTC)

The article 2016 New San Jose Builders Victorias season has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Fails

WP:NSEASONS

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. Osplace 03:05, 3 November 2016 (UTC)

The article 2016 Cignal HD Spikers season has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Fails

WP:NSEASONS

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. Osplace 01:44, 7 November 2016 (UTC)

Template:Bangkok Glass Volleyball Club roster has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Frietjes (talk) 19:31, 12 November 2016 (UTC)

Template:PlayerVB2 has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Frietjes (talk) 19:33, 12 November 2016 (UTC)

Template:2016 FIVB-Rexona Ades roster has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Frietjes (talk) 19:35, 12 November 2016 (UTC)

Hi Mmhuang,

In order to better control the quality of new pages, keep out the spam, and welcome the genuine newbies, the current system we introduced in 2011 is being updated and improved. The documentation and tutorials have also been revised and given a facelift. Most importantly a new user group New Page Reviewer has been created.

Under the new rule, you may find that you are temporarily unable to mark new pages as reviewed. However, this is nothing to worry about - most current experienced patrollers are being accorded the the new right without the need to apply, and if you have significant previous experience of patrolling new pages, we strongly encourage you to apply for the new right as soon as possible - we need all the help we can get, and we are now providing a dynamic, supportive environment for your work.

Find out more about this exiting new user right now at New Page Reviewers and be sure to read the new tutorial before applying. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 04:29, 13 November 2016 (UTC)