User talk:Linguist111/Archive 1

September 2015

Hello, I'm Materialscientist. I noticed that you recently removed some content without explaining why. In the future, it would be helpful to others if you described your changes to Wikipedia with an accurate edit summary. If this was a mistake, don't worry; I restored the removed content. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks. Materialscientist (talk) 11:24, 9 September 2015 (UTC)

Benelux' Next Top Model (cycle 1) ‎

Your recent edits

Hello and welcome to Wikipedia. When you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion (but never when editing articles), please be sure to sign your posts. There are two ways to do this. Either:

1. Add four tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment; or
2. With the cursor positioned at the end of your comment, click on the signature button ( or ) located above the edit window.

This will automatically insert a signature with your username or IP address and the time you posted the comment. This information is necessary to allow other editors to easily see who wrote what and when.

Thank you. --SineBot (talk) 14:12, 9 September 2015 (UTC)

Linguist111, you are invited to the Teahouse!

Hi Linguist111! Thanks for contributing to Wikipedia. Be our guest at the Teahouse! The Teahouse is a friendly space where new editors can ask questions about contributing to Wikipedia and get help from peers and experienced editors. I hope to see you there! Missvain (I'm a Teahouse host) Visit the Teahouse This message was delivered automatically by your robot friend, HostBot (talk) 17:22, 9 September 2015 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: sandbox (October 9)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Primefac was: 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 User:Linguist111/sandbox 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 get Wikipedia's Live Help real-time chat help from experienced editors.

Primefac (talk) 17:20, 9 October 2015 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: sandbox (November 17)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Vincent60030 was: 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 User:Linguist111/sandbox 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 get Wikipedia's Live Help real-time chat help from experienced editors.

Vincent60030 (talk) 15:49, 17 November 2015 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:09, 24 November 2015 (UTC)

Add dimunitive names

For this article? Top Model po-russki (cycle 5) Trafalk09 (talk) 21:22, 13 January 2016 (UTC)

Articles for deletion/La's NTM

On Tuesday I nominated the article La's NTM and related articles for deletion, because I, along with other users, believe it to be a hoax (see Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/La's NTM). Two other users nominated the pages for speedy deletion. Wikipedia:Criteria for speedy deletion says speedy deletion can take place in "cases in which administrators have broad consensus to bypass deletion discussion, at their discretion, and immediately delete Wikipedia pages or media". I cannot tell whether or not the users are administrators, and I am not sure if or when I am allowed to tag the pages for speedy deletion. If someone could help me understand what to do, I would be grateful. Thank you in advance.

Linguist111 (talk) 15:11, 14 January 2016 (UTC)

That section from WP:CSD says that an admin can bypass the discussion by speedy-deleting if appropriate; the two users concerned only expressed their view that the pages were speediable. They could have actually tagged them with speedy tags, which would have put them in the speedy queue, but they didn't. However, having looked at it, I think this is a good case for exercising my discretion to bypass the deletion discussion, and I have closed it and deleted all four pages. Thanks for tagging them! JohnCD (talk) 15:28, 14 January 2016 (UTC)

Thank you for your help! :) Linguist111 (talk) 15:33, 14 January 2016 (UTC)

Thanks!

:) Trafalk09 (talk) 18:25, 14 January 2016 (UTC)

January 2016

Hello Linguist111, Here is DDKay. I don't make a mistake. At first this Symbol "&" is only for constants, who where eliminated in the same Moment. For example: Andrea was eliminated before Anne. Yes both in the same Episode and dicision, but not in the same moment. So we can say, which one goes before the other. The second is your nowrap for Michelle Luise Lafleur. I dont get the nowrap and the importance of that. And the last fact is, Lisa-Giulias surname is "Wendt" not "Wende". Thanks and greetings, DDKay. — Preceding unsigned comment added by DDKay (talk • contribs) 10:01, 16 January 2016 (UTC) 1. It's only an order. It's not for placement, only to show the order of elimantion. Andrea goes first, and Anne second. Its not about, who is placed higher. 2. We dont need the nowraps. Almost every name has an reakline, why do we need a nowrap only for some constants? 3. im sorry with Lisa-Giulia. Youre right with her surname. — Preceding unsigned comment added by DDKay (talk • contribs) 10:16, 16 January 2016 (UTC) Please stop the nowraps. Valerie-Charlotte Kirchner von Schröder is the longest name, and dont have a nowarp too. And her name has an break like this Valerie-
Charlotte ..... Michelle-Luises first name is without nowarp in the same line like this Michelle-Luise
Lafleur. — Preceding unsigned comment added by DDKay (talk • contribs) 10:26, 16 January 2016 (UTC) No, I see Michelle-Luise in the same line, without the nowrap. Can we only take the first part of they names, for example, Michelle Lafleur, like it was before? i remember, that only the nicknames came in the table. Heidi said to Michelle-Luise, Valerie-Charlotte and so on only Michelle or Valerie. — Preceding unsigned comment added by DDKay (talk • contribs) 10:38, 16 January 2016 (UTC) Yes, in the opening they have for example "Valerie-Charlotte", but Heidi said only "Valerie". We can only put there given names in nowarps, not the complete names? For example only Valerie-Charlotte, and not Valerie-Charlotte Kirchner von Schröder? — Preceding unsigned comment added by DDKay (talk • contribs) 10:55, 16 January 2016 (UTC)

18 January La's NTM deletions

Hi there. Now, it's entirely possible that I'm doing it wrong, but I don't believe I am (and certain I'll find out if I have erred). I have removed your AfD tags on this series of hoax article reposts, and replaced them with simply:

{{db-repost|1=Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/La's NTM}}

As I understand it, when there's a closed and uncontroversial AfD which resulted in deletion, there's no need to put another AfD tag on the article, and you should just go direct to CSD G4. If I have got it wrong, apologies, but I'm reasonably certain I did the right thing. You may revert if you strongly believe differently. Thanks and regards.

--Murph9000 (talk) 13:36, 18 January 2016 (UTC)