User talk:Shaliya waya

Page contents not supported in other languages.
Source: Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.
Hello, Shaliya waya!
helpme}} on your talk page and ask your question there. Please remember to sign your name on talk pages by clicking or using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your username and the date. If you would like to play around with your new Wiki skills, the sandbox is for you. Finally, please do your best to always fill in the edit summary field. Below are some useful links to facilitate your involvement. Happy editing! — Mikhailov Kusserow (talk) 13:31, 19 August 2009 (UTC)[reply
]
Getting started
Getting help
Policies and guidelines

The community

Writing articles
Miscellaneous

Skirt article edit

Hi Shaliya waya, Thanks for editing Wikipedia. I hope you enjoy building the encyclopedia. You recently put back content I had deleted from the

welcome page. Happy editing! -- SiobhanHansa 15:22, 14 September 2007 (UTC)[reply
]

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Cpsignal.jpg

Thanks for uploading

Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline
is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 06:10, 27 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Taser and Taser controversy articles

Hi, thanks for the message. I copied your message to

Talk:Taser controversy#Rename that has more background on "Electroshock weapon" vs "Taser". Flatscan 01:28, 4 December 2007 (UTC)[reply
]

G'day. You might like to see my own discussion proposal. Cheers Bjenks (talk) 07:35, 7 January 2008 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Bjenks (talkcontribs)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Wal-Mart (disambiguation)

I've added an opinion of "rename" in the discussion which appears not to have been considered in the debate. I encourage you to review my reasoning at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Wal-Mart (disambiguation) and determine if you need to reconsider your !vote. Regards. -- Whpq 18:20, 4 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Wal-Mart (disambiguation)

I have reverted your move back to

disambiguation pages). None of the items listed are going to ever be confused with Wal-Mart, but all are connected -- so the list naming is more appropriate here and the disambiguation page is completely inappropriate and unacceptable. I stand firm on this. Dr. Cash (talk) 16:10, 10 December 2007 (UTC)[reply
]

If you look at
WP:AFD, it is clearly stated that an article can be kept, but NOT renamed. Shaliya waya (talk) 17:49, 10 December 2007 (UTC)[reply
]
Please stop this. The article needs no disambiguation, and it is completely and totally inappropriate. There is nothing on the AfD that says it cannot be renamed. I am also disputing the 'no consensus' that the closing admin put on it: the way I see it, there were 7 named users in favor of deletion, 3 named users (and 2 anons with less than 10 edits) in favor of keeping, 4 named users in favor of renaming, and 1 anon in favor of moving to
Wal-Mart. So you don't have any consensus to keep this at a disambiguationn page, either. Dr. Cash (talk) 18:53, 11 December 2007 (UTC)[reply
]


Shaliya waya - walmart's flunkies have taken total control of the walmart article... there's no way for you to do anything to it that they won't just revert. Yet another of the ways WM screws with everyone. (How much you wanna bet they delete this post??)

My take on walmart customers

75.8.39.233 (talk) 19:56, 11 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

AfD nomination of
The Security Age

talk) 23:33, 22 December 2007 (UTC)[reply
]

section A3 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is an article with no content whatsoever, or whose contents consist only of external links, "See also" section, book reference, category tag, template tag, interwiki link, rephrasing of the title, or an attempt to contact the subject of the article. Please see Wikipedia:Stub for our minimum information standards for short articles. Also please note that articles must be on notable subjects and should provide references to reliable sources that verify
their content.

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 (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the article's talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the article 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 article that would would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Dougie WII (talk) 16:30, 3 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Wal-Mart (Disambiguation)

Please stop re-creating this page and inserting it at

Wal-Mart
article itself, which would increase the visibility of each of the articles in the list (you should be happy about this).

If you continue to place this cat-and-mouse game with this article without discussing your actions on the

talk page or even leaving an edit summary, it will be considered vandalism and you will be banned. Dr. Cash (talk) 22:43, 9 January 2008 (UTC)[reply
]

I think that Derek.cashman has some valid points, and that you have some valid arguments as well. Instead of directly talking to one another you have both ignored each other. It think it would be best if both of you would talk about it at
welcome to wikipedia). Jon513 (talk) 00:01, 10 January 2008 (UTC)[reply
]
All through this process, there may be others who are for or against this article based on what they have read others wite about. At the same time, a single user, Derek Cashman, seems determined to kill a Wal-Mart disambiguation page out, perhaps out of a personal distaste for one. He just says he is firm and will not budge on it otherwise. Wikipedians are supposed to improve, NOT destroy Wikipedia. A Wikipedia page is only supposed to be deleted only if it is not notable or otherwise seriously inappropriate. The general practice is that when there is any doubt, the page is kept.Shaliya waya (talk) 01:48, 10 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I do not believe that Derek Cashman is interested in destroying Wikipedia. To say that anyone who doesn't think that there should be a disambiguation page is a vandal is not helpful. There are reasons to keep the page and reasons to delete it. What we need to do now is talk about it.
While pages are generally kept when there is 'no consensus' it does not mean that there is a consensus to kept. No consensus means that there is no consensus and more discussion has to take place. Pages can be moved or redirected or deleted if it will improve the encyclopedia by doing so; not only when they are 'not notable'.
Derek has explain his reasons for wanting the page to go at
Talk:Wal-Mart#List of Wal-Mart articles. It would be appropriate for you to read what he says and respond. Please focus on reasons why you think the page adds to the quality of the encyclopedia, not on interpreting the AfD debate. Jon513 (talk) 10:00, 10 January 2008 (UTC)[reply
]
I feel that what Derek Cashman says about this page is propaganda for his own views, and is not allowing others to formulate their own ideas. I originally created this page because I found that our society has given "Wal-Mart" and "Walmart" other meanings beyond the name of the store, and indeed, there were Wikipedia articles on those meanings. The easiest way to find them would be via a disambiguation page after entering Wal-Mart and clicking on otheruses.Shaliya waya (talk) 15:39, 10 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Derek has pointed out on the talk page that most of the content of the disambig page is integrated into the article and the rest are in the "see also". You have not responded to this. Jon513 (talk) 19:53, 12 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

AfD nomination of Wal-Mart (disambiguation)

An article that you have been involved in editing, Wal-Mart (disambiguation), has been listed for deletion. If you are interested in the deletion discussion, please participate by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Wal-Mart (disambiguation) (2nd nomination). Thank you. Jon513 (talk) 14:36, 13 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

This is an automated message from CorenSearchBot. I have performed a web search with the contents of Walmart (disambiguation), and it appears to be very similar to another wikipedia page: Wal-Mart (disambiguation). It is possible that you have accidentally duplicated contents, or made an error while creating the page— you might want to look at the pages and see if that is the case.

This message was placed automatically, and it is possible that the bot is confused and found similarity where none actually exists. If that is the case, you can remove the tag from the article and it would be appreciated if you could drop a note on

talk) 00:45, 18 January 2008 (UTC)[reply
]

AfD nomination of Roach Motel (computing)

I have nominated Roach Motel (computing), an article you created, for deletion. I do not feel that this article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and have explained why at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Roach Motel (computing). Your opinions on the matter are welcome at that same discussion page; also, you are welcome to edit the article to address these concerns. Thank you for your time. Martijn Hoekstra (talk) 21:07, 23 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Another editor has added the {{

prod}} template, the article will not be deleted, but note that it may still be sent to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. BJBot (talk) 20:01, 3 March 2008 (UTC)[reply
]

AfD nomination of Toni (slang)

What Wikipedia is not
").

Your opinions on whether the article meets inclusion criteria and what should be done with the article are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at

sign your comments
with four tildes (~~~~).

You may also edit the article during the discussion to improve it but should not remove the

articles for deletion template from the top of the article; such removal will not end the deletion debate. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 16:59, 4 March 2008 (UTC)[reply
]

July 2008

cut and paste move", and it is considered undesirable because it splits the page history
which is needed for attribution and various other purposes. Instead, the software used by Wikipedia has a feature that allows pages to be moved to a new title together with their edit history.

In most cases, you should be able to move an article yourself using the

the Orphanage 17:54, 21 July 2008 (UTC)[reply
]


Image copyright problem with Image:Intown.jpg

Thanks for uploading

here
- just go to the image, click edit, and add one of those. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided copyright information for them as well.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

This is an automated notice by STBotI. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. NOTE: once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. STBotI (talk) 00:11, 21 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]


Image copyright problem with Image:Intown.jpg

Image Copyright problem
Image Copyright problem

Thank you for uploading

image description page
.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their license and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link.

If you have any questions, please feel free to ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thanks again for your cooperation. Sdrtirs (talk) 22:38, 22 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry! I didn't the text in it. Now is fixed. I added the correspondent tag. Please take a look at it. Regards, Sdrtirs (talk) 18:12, 24 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Trust

Hallo, the article at

Trust (social sciences) already covers the concept of trust in the way your new article seems to be doing, so I've reverted your edits to make it back to a redirect and will do a Requested Move to return to the previous situation. "Trust" is a word with "no primary usage", so the disambiguation page needs to be at Trust. PamD (talk) 07:58, 27 August 2008 (UTC)[reply
]

Proposed deletion of Wet paint sign

A

dated prod}} notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page
.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised because even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the

talk) 17:49, 5 September 2008 (UTC)[reply
]

If you wish to contest the delete consensus of the

deletion review if you want to. Cirt (talk) 00:06, 5 October 2008 (UTC)[reply
]

Regarding your comment: The closing admin, most likely working fast through the whole thing, probably saw the overwhelming number of "deletes," and just said "the result was delete" with no further comment. -- This is not only incorrect and an assumption on your part - it is an inappropriate comment and not conducive to constructive dialogue in the

deletion review. I respectfully request that you refactor your comment there. Thank you. Cirt (talk) 15:38, 5 October 2008 (UTC)[reply
]

Your recent comments at the DRV are neither productive nor justified. Please remain
talk) 08:16, 6 October 2008 (UTC)[reply
]

Racism

Wikipedia is not the place for people who want to be victims. Looking over your talk page, you are clearly here to simply for disruptive purposes. Nor do I believe you are black, as we tend to have more pride than that. Please find another venue for editing and cease suggesting anyone disagreeing with you is racist, because that's absolutely disgusting. -- Logical Premise Ergo? 16:28, 7 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

AfD nomination of Jett Travolta

Jett Travolta, has been listed for deletion. If you are interested in the deletion discussion, please participate by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jett Travolta. Thank you. WWGB (talk) 05:03, 6 January 2009 (UTC)[reply
]

CfD nomination of Category:Rude behavior

renaming. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the Categories for discussion page. Thank you. Cgingold (talk) 13:06, 13 February 2009 (UTC)[reply
]

Wal-Mart disambiguation at DR

Just letting you know that the discussion for Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Wal-Mart (disambiguation) (3rd nomination) has been listed for deletion review at Wikipedia:Deletion review/Log/2009 July 15. You may be interested in commenting. Tatterfly (talk) 22:19, 16 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

File:Intown.jpg listed for deletion

An image or media file that you uploaded or altered,

ZooFari 23:10, 7 September 2009 (UTC)[reply
]

Template:Adopt has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Thank you. -- Alan Liefting (talk) - 23:27, 28 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Adoption template

I fixed the view/discuss/edit links on Template:Adopt, and also added a bunch of articles that I found by looking at Category:WikiProject Adoption, fostering, orphan care and displacement articles. I think it is ready to be placed on articles, but take a look and let me know what you think. --RL0919 (talk) 03:41, 9 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Roach Motel (insect trap)

Greetings! Since you have edited

Talk:Roach Motel (insect trap)#Appearances in popular media. Cheers! bd2412 T 22:00, 13 November 2009 (UTC)[reply
]

Black toilet seat phobia

The article

Black toilet seat phobia has been proposed for deletion
because of the following concern:

Likely a
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 {{

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 {{

dated prod}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. The speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Accounting4Taste:talk 16:44, 30 December 2009 (UTC)[reply
]

Template:Abuse has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Thank you. User:Woohookitty Disamming fool! 11:51, 15 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Abuse relisting

I am extremely shocked that User:Plastikspork has relisted ‎ Abuse. It has been a major nightmare for me having to waste my time on this - now the ordeal goes on for another week. I dont think User:Plastikspork looked at this properly, all those who wanted deletion have now withdrawn or moved to a neutral stance (User:Apoc2400 for example. There isnt any compromise to be reached as the view is now unanimously a Keep. There has been far too much discussion already. I am likely to have a heart attack at this rate.--Penbat (talk) 19:06, 24 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The new discussion is here:

Wikipedia:Templates_for_discussion/Log/2010_January_24#Discussion_after_relisting

--Penbat (talk) 13:11, 25 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Abuse TFD looks like a complete mess

see User_talk:Plastikspork#Please_tell_where_i_have_voted_twice_in_the_new_discussion_.3F

It looks like administrators just count bits of emboldened text and ignore the fact that opinions may change as the result of discussion. 3 of the editors in the 1st TFD changed from delete to neutral but User:Plastikspork looks to have ignored that and just gone by their initial positions. If he had picked up their later views there would have been no justification for relisting the TFD and wasting everybodies time all over again.--Penbat (talk) 18:35, 25 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I do agree that this should be closed. There is no way this template could be deleted and yet everyone will be happy with the decision. Shaliya waya (talk) 16:19, 26 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The article Bereavement flight has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

This is more of a dictionary definition, and there isn't a lot which can be expanded upon within an encyclopaedic context

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'm chanting as we speak 22:36, 30 March 2010 (UTC)[reply
]

Pet naming

Pet naming, an article that you created, for deletion. I do not think that this article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and have explained why at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Pet naming. Your opinions on the matter are welcome at that same discussion page; also, you are welcome to edit the article to address these concerns. Thank you for your time.

Please contact me if you're unsure why you received this message. -- Alan Liefting (talk) - 05:47, 12 May 2010 (UTC)[reply

]

With all due respect Shaliya waya, after looking at your talk page, perhaps you own vote on the RfA to keep your article might not carry much weight. If you need help in deciding what articles to create, don't hesitate to drop me a line on my talk page.--Kudpung (talk) 09:49, 12 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I have nominated Wet paint sign, an article that you created, for deletion. I do not think that this article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and have explained why at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Wet paint sign (2nd nomination). Your opinions on the matter are welcome at that same discussion page; also, you are welcome to edit the article to address these concerns. Thank you for your time.

Please contact me if you're unsure why you received this message. -- Alan Liefting (talk) - 10:01, 12 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Your edits

Hi Shaliya waya! I've noticed that you are a keen creator of articles for our encyclopedia, but many of your articles get nominated for deletion. I've been bold and had a look at most of your articles and I'm wondering if we could find a way together of avoiding all these unpleasant AfD discussions. I would be happy to work with you to find a solution, but you could also help by going through your articles and bringing them up to standard before they too get listed for deletion. You could start for example by tweaking the references so that they display properly without all the naked URLs. As I mentioned before, please don't hesitate to ask me on my talk page foe any suggestions. --Kudpung (talk) 11:02, 12 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I'm wondering if you could take time out to read your talk page.--Kudpung (talk) 02:07, 17 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry for not getting back. I hope you understand I am a very busy woman. I work for the federal government. It may look like I do a lot of Wikipedia editing, but I am really doing it during spare time and on my days off. Shaliya waya (talk) 11:52, 18 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the explanation. I just thought that if you were to look occasionally at the relative high volume of controversy your edits generate, you might be able to adapt your efforts at editing and/or choice of creations in a way that might reduce the time other editors have to take discussing them. Please don't get me wrong - I'm here to help.--Kudpung (talk) 16:23, 18 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Breitbarting listed at Redirects for discussion

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect

Breitbarting. Since you had some involvement with the Breitbarting redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion (if you have not already done so). Uncle Dick (talk) 19:46, 5 August 2010 (UTC)[reply
]

Categories for discussion nomination of Category:Deborah Cox

renaming. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the Categories for discussion page. Thank you. Starcheerspeaksnewslostwars (talk) 23:51, 13 August 2010 (UTC)[reply
]

Unpleasant odor

The article

Unpleasant odor has been proposed for deletion
. The proposed-deletion notice added to the article should explain why.

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 {{

dated prod}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. The speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Sasata (talk) 18:55, 22 September 2010 (UTC)[reply
]

Autopatrolled

Hello, this is just to let you know that I have granted you the

new page patrollers
. Please remember:

  • This permission does not give you any special status or authority
  • Submission of inappropriate material may lead to its removal
  • You may wish to display the {{
    User wikipedia/autopatrolled
    }} userbox on your user page
  • If, for any reason, you decide yo do not want the permission, let me know and I can remove it
If you have any questions about the permission, don't hesitate to ask. Otherwise, happy editing! HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 23:27, 28 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

This is an automated message from CorenSearchBot. I have performed a web search with the contents of Casino security, and it appears to include material copied directly from http://www.casinomr.com.

It is possible that the bot is confused and found similarity where none actually exists. If that is the case, you can remove the tag from the article. The article will be reviewed to determine if there are any copyright issues.

If substantial content is duplicated and it is not

talk) 00:20, 1 December 2010 (UTC)[reply
]

Interesting it found a Wikipedia copy! Good job on the article by the way, make sure you nominate it at
WP:DYK,Sadads (talk) 02:55, 1 December 2010 (UTC)[reply
]

A discussion has begun about whether the article Tragedy (event), which you created or to which you contributed, should be deleted. While contributions are welcome, an article may be deleted if it is inconsistent with Wikipedia policies and guidelines for inclusion, explained in the deletion policy.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Tragedy (event) until a consensus is reached, and you are welcome to contribute to the discussion.

You may edit the article during the discussion, including to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion template from the top of the article. Bitmapped (talk) 04:38, 3 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of
Phillip Greaves
for deletion

The article

Phillip Greaves is being discussed concerning whether it is suitable for inclusion as an article according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted
.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Phillip Greaves until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on good 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 template from the top of the article. NW (Talk) 22:05, 22 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Following on...

Hi Shaliya. Next time you want to initiate discussion on how an administrator closes a deletion debate, I'd suggest that you start be talking with the actual administrator. The day before you took this to DRV, I'd already been discussing the close on my talk, I'd despite you feeling like I'm an "attacking wikilawyer" most people find me pretty reasonable. As I stated several times during the DRV (but that oddly no one took me up on?) I'd have been happy to restore the deleted material into userspace and assist in improving the article.

Aaron Brenneman (talk) 22:20, 18 January 2011 (UTC)[reply
]

The article Massacre is being discussed concerning whether it is suitable for inclusion as an article according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Massacre until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on good 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 template from the top of the article. --

talk) 07:56, 18 February 2011 (UTC)[reply
]

Internal copyright violation

This edit is a copyright violation because you have not acknowledged in the edit history of the article Massacre that you copied content from another Wikipedia article, in this case

talk) 11:16, 18 February 2011 (UTC)[reply
]

See "

talk) 11:24, 18 February 2011 (UTC)[reply
]

Categories for discussion nomination of Category:Monifah

Category:Monifah, which you created, has been nominated for discussion. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the Categories for discussion page. Thank you. —Justin (koavf)TCM☯ 05:09, 2 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The article List of massacres in Israel has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Single massacre is not a "list"; massacre took place one month before the establishment of the State of Israel; see
List of killings and massacres before the 1948 Palestine war

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 {{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. The speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. — Malik Shabazz Talk/Stalk 02:58, 13 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of List of massacres in Israel for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article List of massacres in Israel 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 Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of massacres in Israel until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on good 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 template from the top of the article. — Malik Shabazz Talk/Stalk 18:56, 13 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

British massacre

Hey! You are doing a good job of collating the massacre-scale crimes of Power. On the Mau Mau Uprising page, there's one of ours tucked away in the footnotes, the Chuka Massacre; see here for details. Rule, Britannia!
Iloveandrea (talk) 22:29, 3 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Lists of massacres: layout

It would be best if the tables wer automatically in chronological order. Otherwize, it's impossible for readers to sort the tables chronologically (unless we use YYYY/MM/DD format). Also, please remember that

most countries
don't use the US date format—for example, in the US it's January 1, 1900 but in the UK it's 1 January 1900.

I think we should follow the layout used on

List of massacres in the United Kingdom or List of events named massacres
.

What do you think? ~Asarlaí 19:41, 7 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I have been placing it in the American format, which I am accustomed to. I you wish to change it, I do not mind. Shaliya waya (talk) 19:58, 7 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Višegrad massacres

Hello, I saw that you'd just added links in the Sjeverin massacre and Višegrad massacres. There are enough complications already in dealing with articles on massacres in the Bosnian war, notably the Srebrenica massacre/genocide, for me not to want to get involved in a wider project but if there is any information you particularly want to discuss please feel free to contact me. This is the anniversary period for the Višegrad massacres (anniversary period for many of the terrible things that happened in Bosnia in 1992 but in Višegrad it was a concentrated sequence of terrible events) - Pionirska Street happened on the 14th and Bikavac on the 27th. If you're interested in finding out more about Višegrad and Sjeverin, the Visegrad Genocide Memories blog[1] is a trustworthy source of background information. Opbeith (talk) 08:39, 19 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I have been spending the past several weeks trying to create lists of massacres for each country, which is a huge job. I have been doing this because there is already a page called List of events named massacres that indiscriminately lists massacres. This list is very incomplete and it lists only a few hundred massacres. It appears there have been thousands of massacres throughout world history, and it is not practical to list them all on a single page. This is not a good page to keep in the future.
One problem that I have faced is that over time, many countries have merged, split, changed names, or changed boundaries. This leaves a question as to what list certain massacres belong in. At the moment, I have been trying in most cases, with exceptions, to place each massacre in the list in the country where the present location is. But it does not have to remain that way. If someone feels there is a better way to organize this or make these placements, this can always be discussed. I am open to any such ideas. Shaliya waya (talk) 00:24, 20 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Massacre series

I am glad to see someone else also is interested in this issue. Thanks Kanatonian (talk) 21:52, 30 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

A barnstar for you!

The Original Barnstar
For your effort is making the massacre series articles better. Kanatonian (talk) 21:53, 30 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

List of massacres in the United Kingdom

Hi I have reverted you last edits to

List of massacres in the United Kingdom see the talk page. Jim Sweeney (talk) 23:09, 21 August 2011 (UTC)[reply
]

New Page Patrol survey

New page patrol – Survey Invitation


Hello Shaliya waya! The

WMF
is currently developing new tools to make new page patrolling much easier. Whether you  have patrolled many pages or only a few, we now need to  know about your experience. The survey takes only 6 minutes, and the information you provide will not be shared with third parties other than to assist us in analyzing the results of the survey; the WMF will not use the information to identify you.

  • If this invitation  also appears on other accounts you  may  have, please complete the  survey  once only. 
  • If this has been sent to you in error and you have never patrolled new pages, please ignore it.

Please click HERE to take part.
Many thanks in advance for providing this essential feedback.


You are receiving this invitation because you  have patrolled new pages. For more information, please see NPP Survey. Global message delivery 13:14, 26 October 2011 (UTC)

The article List of massacres in the Czech Republic has been proposed for deletion. The proposed-deletion notice added to the article should explain why.

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 {{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.

Category:Invitation

Category:Invitation, which you created, has been nominated for discussion. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the Categories for discussion page. Thank you. Pichpich (talk) 21:28, 24 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Samanta Institute of Science and Technology 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 Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Samanta Institute of Science and Technology until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on good 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 template from the top of the article. DoriTalkContribs 05:28, 29 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

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

Moving this to Wiktionary. Requesting delete

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 {{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. Alin0Steglinski (talk) 12:16, 11 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The article List of massacres in Uzbekistan has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

There's only one entry in this list; this article can just be a redirect to that page.

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 {{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

talk) 16:13, 14 October 2012 (UTC)[reply
]

Referencing articles

Hi. I've mentioned this several times previously but it appears that you are still not aware of the requirement to reference articles, in particular at Posthumous trial , a recent creation, and Parcopresis. Please follow the links on the welcome message to various help pages and provide references. Thanks.Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 23:59, 16 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I am aware of referencing and I am generally a good referencer. I got side-tracked when creating this article and never got to do that. Whenever I have free time next, I plan to get to that and add more to the article as well. Shaliya waya (talk) 01:58, 20 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Jordan Kitts Music for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Jordan Kitts Music 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 Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jordan Kitts Music until a consensus is reached, and anyone 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. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dew Kane (talkcontribs) 21:25, 31 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Flower girl

Regarding the redirect of flower girl (disambiguation) to flower girl I am wondering if we should reconsider perhaps changing the main article into a disambig. The term also refers to an occupation of girls who sell flowers. This is depicted in Eliza Doolittle's character from My Fair Lady and Pygmalion (play), and is seen repeatedly throughout historical fictions such as Emma (manga). Since it's small maybe we can just describe both meanings on the same page rather than splitting? Ranze (talk) 23:35, 29 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Denial of request

The article Denial of request has been proposed for deletion. The proposed deletion notice added to the article should explain why.

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.

Nomination of
List of massacres in Guinea
for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article

List of massacres in Guinea 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 Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of massacres in Guinea until a consensus is reached, and anyone 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. The Banner talk 00:01, 11 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of
List of massacres in Iceland
for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article

List of massacres in Iceland 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 Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of massacres in Iceland until a consensus is reached, and anyone 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. The Banner talk 00:09, 11 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of La Petite Academy

The article La Petite Academy has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

The coverage (references, external links, etc.) does not seem sufficient to justify this article passing
ping me back
. Thank you,

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. Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 09:16, 27 October 2015 (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 La Petite Academy, requesting that it be deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under two or more of the criteria for speedy deletion, by which articles can be deleted at any time, without discussion. If the page meets any of these strictly-defined criteria, then it may be soon be deleted by an administrator. The reasons it has been tagged are:

  • It seems to be unambiguous advertising which only promotes a company, product, group, service or person and would need to be fundamentally rewritten in order to become encyclopedic. (See
    Wikipedia:FAQ/Business
    for more information.
  • It appears to be about a person, organization (band, club, company, etc.), individual animal, or web content, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. (See
    section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion.) Such articles may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable
    .

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by

here. DGG ( talk ) 05:33, 2 November 2015 (UTC)[reply
]

ArbCom elections are now open!

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current

review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:34, 24 November 2015 (UTC)[reply
]

Just to let you know

You have been mentioned at

]

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

this is not a dictionary.

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. That man from Nantucket (talk) 13:06, 7 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Repub listed at Redirects for discussion

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Repub. Since you had some involvement with the Repub redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. - CHAMPION (talk) (contributions) (logs) 00:36, 2 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of List of massacres in North Korea for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article List of massacres in North Korea 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 Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of massacres in North Korea until a consensus is reached, and anyone 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. – Finnusertop (talkcontribs) 10:07, 26 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination for deletion of Template:Gambling terminology

Template:Gambling terminology has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Ten Pound Hammer(What did I screw up now?) 14:26, 7 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

List of Wal-Mart articles listed at Redirects for discussion

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect List of Wal-Mart articles. Since you had some involvement with the List of Wal-Mart articles redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. Ten Pound Hammer(What did I screw up now?) 06:11, 14 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Notice

The file File:Cpsignal.jpg has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Orphaned image with no foreseeable encyclopedic 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 {{proposed deletion/dated files}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the file's talk page.

Please consider addressing the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated files}} 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. Pkbwcgs (talk) 08:29, 16 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

"Drug raid" listed at Redirects for discussion

A discussion is taking place to address the redirect Drug raid. The discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2020 August 18#Drug raid until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. Steel1943 (talk) 22:58, 18 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Songs in memory of deceased persons has been nominated for renaming

Category:Songs in memory of deceased persons has been nominated for renaming. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. Ten Pound Hammer(What did I screw up now?) 16:39, 23 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

A tag has been placed on

section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion
.

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. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself. Liz Read! Talk! 01:31, 14 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The redirect Employee abuse has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Anyone, including you, is welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2023 June 23 § Employee abuse until a consensus is reached. Steel1943 (talk) 20:06, 23 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Permission slip for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Permission slip 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 Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Permission slip 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 until the discussion has finished.

Boleyn (talk) 16:23, 9 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]