User talk:Cyril Wack
October 2008[edit]
Welcome to Wikipedia. The recent edit you made to INōto has been reverted, as it appears to be unconstructive. Use the sandbox for testing; if you believe the edit was constructive, ensure that you provide an informative edit summary. You may also wish to read the introduction to editing. Thank you. Flewis(talk) 13:15, 19 October 2008 (UTC)
Proposed deletion of Nooto[edit]
A proposed deletion template has been added to the article Nooto, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process because of the following concern:
- Nooto
All contributions are appreciated, but this article may not satisfy Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice should explain why (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{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 proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. Nuttah (talk) 16:58, 16 November 2008 (UTC)
Proposed deletion of Nooto[edit]
A proposed deletion template has been added to the article Nooto, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process because of the following concern:
- lacks notability or third party sources
All contributions are appreciated, but this article may not satisfy Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice should explain why (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{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 proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. 16x9 (talk) 20:17, 21 December 2008 (UTC)
Cut-and-paste move[edit]
Hi, and thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. It appears that you tried to give FEEN a different title by copying its content and pasting either the same content, or an edited version of it, into another page with a different name. This is known as a "cut-and-paste move", and it is undesirable because it splits the page history, which is legally required for attribution. 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, once your account is four days old and has ten edits, you should be able to move an article yourself using the "Move" tab at the top of the page. This both preserves the page history intact and automatically creates a redirect from the old title to the new. If you cannot perform a particular page move yourself this way (e.g. because a page already exists at the target title), please follow the instructions at requested moves to have it moved by someone else. Also, if there are any other pages that you moved by copying and pasting, even if it was a long time ago, please list them at Wikipedia:Cut-and-paste-move repair holding pen. Thank you. Kolbasz (talk) 21:21, 1 September 2013 (UTC)
Nomination of Portable Chess Notation for deletion[edit]
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Portable Chess Notation 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/Portable Chess Notation 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. SpinningSpark 18:29, 30 November 2013 (UTC)
- Hi Cyril, I notice you are still working on this article. I don't want you to waste your effort - you need to address the concerns at the deletion debate first. You need to find sources that establish notability otherwise the article will likely get deleted. SpinningSpark 11:59, 5 December 2013 (UTC)
- Thanks for your notification. I just added the main source of the article which is the specification and implementation guide. I would also precise that the current PCN format definition is already stable and its referenced document will switch from Release Candidate status to version 1.0.0 very soon. Cyril - 14:16, 5 December 2013 (UTC)
Nomination of Forsyth–Edwards Expanded Notation for deletion[edit]
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Forsyth–Edwards Expanded Notation 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/Forsyth–Edwards Expanded Notation 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. SpinningSpark 10:55, 5 December 2013 (UTC)