User talk:Natg 19/Archive 1

This is an archive of past discussions with Natg 19. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Archive 1

Archive 2 >

All Pages:

1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5 - 6 - 7 - 8 - ... (up to 100)

Speedy deletion of Wikipeda tags

A tag has been placed on Wikipeda tags, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a redirect to an article talk page, image description page, image talk page, mediawiki page, mediawiki talk page, category talk page, portal talk page, template talk page, help talk, user page, user talk or special page from the main/article space.

If you can fix the redirect to point to a mainspace page, please do so and remove the speedy deletion tag. However, please do not remove the speedy deletion tag unless you are fixing the redirect. If you think the redirect should be retained as is for some reason, you can request that administrators wait a while before deleting it. To do this, affix the template {{hangon}} to the page and state your reasoning on the article's talk page. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. -- IRP ☎ 17:47, 18 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Nikola Mirotić

I noticed you've reverted my edit of the 2011 NBA Draft article regarding Nikola Mirotić twice. I consider FIBA Europe a VERY reliable source for the fact that he has represented Spain at youth level. Under FIBA rules, a player cannot represent a nation unless he has citizenship in that country. To quote the article that I used as the reference (emphasis added): "A player that can't stay out of the headlines in Madrid is Mirotic, an all-tournament team selection at last year's U20 European Championship while representing Spain."

Just want to let you know that Mirotić is indeed a Spanish citizen, as well as a Montenegrin. — Dale Arnett (talk) 05:41, 24 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Harley Graham

Hey, thanks for noticing the problematic redirect at Harley Graham. Redirects can't be deleted via proposed deletion, so I've nominated it at redirects for discussion instead. Discussions for that redirect and also Alexandria Forrester, which related, can be found at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2012 August 27; your input's welcome. Thanks again – Arms & Hearts (talk) 05:23, 27 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Bob Pastrick

Basically same as above, prod removed. Try listing at redirects for discussion. Thank you. Rotten regard Softnow 01:35, 1 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

List of Popes

Hello..

I added the blank spaces to the religious orders section so that it would be easier to read/understand. When I added the numbers they came up to 42. So wouldn't it be easier to change the totals to reflect the numbers, ex. Benedictines (17) and including Camaldolese(1) to Benedictines (16) Camaldolese(1). You could take out the phrase "and including" and move the bullet point over so that it would remain that religious order.

roberto221 Roberto221 (talk) 23:57, 13 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Pope Francis

Your unexplained deletion of the perfectly reasonable "See also" section of Pope Francis is not appreciated. It's hard to believe you're acting in good faith. Bmclaughlin9 (talk) 20:01, 18 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

April 2013

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to vandalize Wikipedia, as you did at Swiss Guard ‎, you may be blocked from editing. L Faraone 18:58, 1 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Leon Sandcastle for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Leon Sandcastle 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/Leon Sandcastle 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 Clardak (talk • contribs) 10:23, 27 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Draft field in basketball articles

The draft field on NBA articles is not used to denote trades after a player is drafted. It just records the team who drafted them. Please stop adding the parenthetical statement "traded to Team X." Thanks. Rikster2 (talk) 20:55, 28 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, thanks, I'll revert any other changes I made with that. Natg 19 (talk) 20:56, 28 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

no problem, and thanks for taking interest in basketball articles and trying to improve them. Rikster2 (talk) 20:59, 28 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for November 27

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Rudi Johnson, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Chad Johnson (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:04, 27 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

January 2014

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Hostages (TV series) may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "()"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

television by Alon Aranya and [[Jeffrey Nachmanoff]], it is based on the [[Israeli]] [[Hostages (Israeli TV series|series of the same name]] created by Omri Givon and Rotem Shamir and produced by

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 22:51, 8 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for January 11

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Prayer at Jordan–Hare, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Stan White (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:04, 11 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Foul (basketball)‎

I was not trying to express a point-of-view in this article about how the game should be played, but merely describe that committing a personal foul is unremarkable. If you have better wording or a suitable citation, I'd appreciate it. Spike-from-NH (talk) 21:34, 7 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for June 6

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Los Angeles Kings, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Willie Mitchell (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 08:57, 6 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/2009–10 Liga Bet

Your Non admin Closure of Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/2009–10 Liga Bet without any rationale .I note that Daniel had reverted a non admin closure by MrScorch6200 and this ANI discussion and this most felt it was close call for a non admin and "Close calls and controversial decisions are better left to an administrator." applied.As it applied then it again applies now .Since Daniel reopened there has been only one more keep.Feel an Admin should close it with a clear rationale.Please note this request is only procedural.Pharaoh of the Wizards (talk) 17:21, 8 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Non-admins are discouraged from closing contentious discussions as per WP:NACD clearly states "Close calls and controversial decisions are better left to an administrator.". This discussion was closed by an Non admin MrScorch6200 and later reopened after a ANI discussion by Daniel and later its policy implications were in a Request for Comment and feel Non admin should not have closed more so without rationale.Having said I would state who do good work in WP:AFD in general and the issue is only with this particular closure.Would you consider reopening the discussion and letting an administrator close the AfD? I would greatly obliged if you reply.Pharaoh of the Wizards (talk) 19:48, 11 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I can reopen the discussion, but I'm not sure what the process for that would be. Is there a decision that you think should be taken on the AfD instead of "no consensus"? Natg 19 (talk) 21:46, 11 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
- Ok, the discussion has been reopened. Natg 19 (talk) 16:37, 12 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. I have closed the AfD as no consensus. Chillum Need help? Type {{ping|Chillum}} 17:00, 12 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Unreal (demo) AfD

You seem to have added a link to the wrong discussion (to the 2006 discussion, rather than the 2014 one) when closing the Afd. Tiptoethrutheminefield (talk) 14:53, 9 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! I fixed it. Natg 19 (talk) 21:39, 9 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Question...

Is there a reason why you have relisted so many AfDs (in a single day, even?). Erpert ^{blah, blah, blah...} 05:58, 12 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
- Sorry if that seems suspicious to you. I have been looking through some of the old AfD pages, and trying to do cleanup on them, and relisting AfDs that seem to have no consensus or have not had much discussion. Natg 19 (talk) 16:37, 12 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Relisting

I'm really not sure why you relisted this discussion. The last relisting doubled the number of opinions in favour of deletion/redirection and there remains one editor in favour of keeping it. It seems like it was relisted because you didn't have the tools to close per consensus. There's no harm in it staying open until an admin comes along to close it. St★lwart¹¹¹ 01:34, 16 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ralph Publicover

how is this no consensus? it was relisted with more people arguing delete? LibStar (talk) 02:40, 17 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Deletion review for Ralph Publicover

An editor has asked for a deletion review of Ralph Publicover. Because you closed the deletion discussion for this page, speedily deleted it, or otherwise were interested in the page, you might want to participate in the deletion review. LibStar (talk) 02:46, 17 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. LibStar (talk) 02:55, 17 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

It will help a lot if you could weight in on the discussion. Chillum Need help? Type {{ping|Chillum}} 05:36, 17 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Anthony Ilott

Hello Natg 19,

I wanted to let you know that I just tagged Anthony Ilott for deletion, because it seems to be an article that was previously deleted by a consensus decision.

If you feel that the article shouldn't be deleted and want more time to work on it, you can contest this deletion, but please don't remove the speedy deletion tag from the top.

You can leave a note on my talk page if you have questions. APK whisper in my ear 07:52, 15 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, I accidentally recreated this page somehow. I was wanting to close the AfD discussion, but as I am not an admin, I must've closed it as "not delete" and the page was recreated. Please delete the page. Natg 19 (talk) 07:54, 15 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

linking from a talk page to a closed AfD

On this well-intended edit of yours: ah, no. The result linked to the first AfD. Please see my subsequent edit. -- Hoary (talk) 00:41, 19 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! Natg 19 (talk) 00:49, 19 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Joe Rogan Experience

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. - TexasAndroid (talk) 02:54, 29 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Sentinels of the Multiverse merger discussion

You took place in a discussion in which the decision to merge the Sentinels Of The Multiverse article with that for the video game port was taken. We are attempting to discuss this merger on the videogame talk page, and are seeking input from the members involved in the discussion. If you would join us that would be appreciated, otherwise, thank you for your time. Aawood (talk) 12:39, 4 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Recent NAC

Please can you revert this and let an admin deal with it. There are very good reasons for doing so, a hint of which can be seen in MelanieN's comment. Thanks. - Sitush (talk) 01:02, 16 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, I reverted it. Natg 19 (talk) 01:04, 16 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks very much. The outcome may well be the same and no offence is intended. - Sitush (talk) 01:05, 16 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Another recent NAC

I request you revert your NAC of Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of bus routes in Singapore and leave it to an admin. Those wishing to keep this article have not made policy based arguments to justify keeping it. AfD is not a ballot. No consensus or delete should be the likely outcomes of this discussion. Regards.Charles (talk) 10:07, 16 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, I have reverted it. Thanks!

Thank you. I have now been able to cite relevant policy.Charles (talk) 18:30, 16 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

You mean there hasn't been policy based arguments that you LIKE. Big difference. Nha Trang ^Allons! 22:07, 16 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]