User talk:OregonD00d

An editor has expressed a concern that this account may be a sockpuppet of Tiramisoo (talk · contribs · logs).
Please refer to the sockpuppet investigation of the sockpuppeteer, and editing habits or contributions of the sockpuppet for evidence. This policy subsection may be helpful.

Account information: block log – contribs – logs – abuse log – CentralAuth

Welcome!

Hello, OregonD00d, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your messages on discussion pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question on this page and then place {{helpme}} before the question. Again, welcome! Katr67 (talk) 02:00, 1 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Forests[edit]

Hello again, please read the stuff I've posted to your other accounts, and here, especially about the manual of style. Your contributions are looking better, thanks! Katr67 (talk) 02:00, 1 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Forest categories[edit]

Please read about Categories. You are using them incorrectly. Not everything with trees on it is a forest. Thanks. Katr67 (talk) 04:05, 1 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

CfD nomination of Category:Forested Areas in Oregon[edit]

Category:Forested Areas in Oregon, which you created, has been nominated for deletion, merging, or 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) 23:10, 1 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Van Duzer Scenic Corridor[edit]

Added standard Oregon State Park info box to your article on Van Duzer Scenic Corridor. You can copy set-up script and then change info next time you do state park article. Welcome Wiki-Oregon team!--Orygun (talk) 21:25, 3 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

August 2008[edit]

Welcome to Wikipedia. We welcome and appreciate your contributions, but we regretfully cannot accept original research. Original research also encompasses novel, unpublished syntheses of previously published material. Please be prepared to cite a reliable source for all of your information. Thank you. Aboutmovies (talk) 08:38, 18 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image without license[edit]

Unspecified source/license for Image:Oregon2.JPG[edit]

Thanks for uploading Image:Oregon2.JPG. The image has been identified as not specifying the copyright status of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. Even if you created the image yourself, you still need to release it so Wikipedia can use it. If you don't indicate the copyright status of the image on the image's description page, using an appropriate copyright tag, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you made this image yourself, you can use copyright tags like {{PD-self}} (to release all rights), {{self|CC-by-sa-3.0|GFDL}} (to require that you be credited), or any tag 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 MifterBot. 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. --MifterBot ^{(Talk • Contribs • Owner)} 15:29, 18 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Unspecified source/license for Image:Mid-Valley.JPG[edit]

Thanks for uploading Image:Mid-Valley.JPG. The image has been identified as not specifying the copyright status of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. Even if you created the image yourself, you still need to release it so Wikipedia can use it. If you don't indicate the copyright status of the image on the image's description page, using an appropriate copyright tag, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you made this image yourself, you can use copyright tags like {{PD-self}} (to release all rights), {{self|CC-by-sa-3.0|GFDL}} (to require that you be credited), or any tag 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 MifterBot. 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. --MifterBot ^{(Talk • Contribs • Owner)} 15:33, 18 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

attributing contributions[edit]

Hi OregonD00d,

It looks like you are enthusiastically contributing to Wikipedia and we all thank you for that. Alas, some of your contributions have been reverted. For example, this edit you attribute to Google maps—which is commendable—but there is no obvious way for someone to check the fact given. Please spend like 15 or 20 minutes reviewing the Pillars of Wikipedia, particularly reliable sources and verifiable facts. If you have any questions, ask here. Thanks, —EncMstr (talk) 17:37, 18 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

CfD nomination of Category:Cultural generations[edit]

Category:Cultural generations, which you created, has been nominated for deletion, merging, or 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.

Signatures[edit]

Hello. In case you didn't know, when you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion, you should sign your posts by typing four tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment. You may also click on the signature button 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 useful because other editors will be able to tell who said what, and when. Thank you. Katr67 (talk) 04:45, 19 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of McDonald State Forest[edit]

A proposed deletion template has been added to the article McDonald State Forest, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. 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. Aboutmovies (talk) 08:16, 19 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Talk:McDonald State Forest[edit]

Please read the talk page linked above. Thanks. Katr67 (talk) 16:29, 19 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Blidworth Woods[edit]

This is an automated message from CorenSearchBot. I have performed a web search with the contents of Blidworth Woods, and it appears to include a substantial copy of http://www.forestry.gov.uk/website/wildwoods.nsf/LUWebDocsByKey/EnglandNottinghamshireNoForestBlidworthWoods. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material; such additions will be deleted. You may use external websites as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences.

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 the maintainer's talk page. CorenSearchBot (talk) 11:58, 7 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

September 2008[edit]

Please do not delete content or templates from pages on Wikipedia, as you did to Emo, without giving a valid reason for the removal in the edit summary. Your content removal does not appear constructive, and has been reverted. Please make use of the sandbox if you'd like to experiment with test edits. Thank you. Eeekster (talk) 08:16, 16 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Culture of the 2000s[edit]

A proposed deletion template has been added to the article Culture of the 2000s, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. 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. Dmwiki (talk) 08:29, 16 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

AfD nomination of Culture of the 2000s[edit]

I have nominated Culture of the 2000s, an article 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/Culture of the 2000s. 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. Dmwiki (talk) 08:54, 16 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

CfD nomination of Category:Modern decades[edit]

Category:Modern decades, which you created, has been nominated for deletion, merging, or 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) 19:11, 16 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Decadeology (disambiguation)[edit]

A proposed deletion template has been added to the article Decadeology (disambiguation), suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. 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. neon white talk 14:30, 17 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Emo[edit]

Please do not add original research or novel syntheses of previously published material to our articles . Please cite a reliable source for all of your information. Thank you.

Speedy deletion of Mimzy (singer)[edit]

A tag has been placed on Mimzy (singer) requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about a person or group of people, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is notable: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, articles that do not indicate the subject's importance or significance may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable, as well as our subject-specific notability guideline for biographies.

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 that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the 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. Lastly, please note that if the article does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that a copy be emailed to you. Pip (talk) 14:56, 20 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion of Mimzy (singer)[edit]

A tag has been placed on Mimzy (singer) requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about a person or group of people, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is notable: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, articles that do not indicate the subject's importance or significance may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable, as well as our subject-specific notability guideline for biographies.

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 that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the 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. Lastly, please note that if the article does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that a copy be emailed to you. Pip (talk) 14:57, 20 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

your recent article because it does not provide independent verifiable sources that it meets the notability guidelines. jimfbleak (talk) 15:05, 20 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

tags[edit]

please don't remove deletion tags yourself jimfbleak (talk) 15:02, 20 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

AfD nomination of List of teen pop artists and bands[edit]

I have nominated List of teen pop artists and bands, an article 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/List of teen pop artists and bands. 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. TallNapoleon (talk) 08:12, 27 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Removing the AFD tag will not stop the discussion. Schuym1 (talk) 16:18, 27 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image without license[edit]

Unspecified source/license for Image:Lights.JPG[edit]

Thanks for uploading Image:Lights.JPG. The image has been identified as not specifying the copyright status of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. Even if you created the image yourself, you still need to release it so Wikipedia can use it. If you don't indicate the copyright status of the image on the image's description page, using an appropriate copyright tag, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you made this image yourself, you can use copyright tags like {{PD-self}} (to release all rights), {{self|CC-by-sa-3.0|GFDL}} (to require that you be credited), or any tag 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 MifterBot. 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. --MifterBot ^{(Talk • Contribs • Owner)} 20:39, 27 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image copyright problem with Image:Lights.jpg[edit]

Thanks for uploading Image:Lights.jpg. The image has been identified as not specifying the copyright status of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. If you don't indicate the copyright status of the image on the image's description page, using an appropriate copyright tag, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. 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 OrphanBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 06:17, 28 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Anti-fashion and tag removal[edit]

Hello. Please stop removing the tags I placed at the top of the article you wrote, Anti-fashion. They are appropriate and shouldn't be removed until the issues cited have been fixed. As of this moment, you have four references, three of which don't mention the term the article is about, and one which uses the term generically with no indication that it has common use as the name of the movement or trend that the article describes. Further, the details you mention appear to be thrown together, and without outside evidence it looks like you are using the term "anti-fashion" yourself to describe a trend that you are synthesizing from these details.—Largo Plazo (talk) 14:12, 18 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

October 2008[edit]

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Anti-fashion. Note that the three-revert rule prohibits making more than three reversions on a single page within a 24 hour period. Additionally, users who perform a large number of reversions in content disputes may be blocked for edit warring, even if they do not technically violate the three-revert rule. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing. Please do not repeatedly revert edits, but use the talk page to work towards wording and content that gains a consensus among editors. If necessary, pursue dispute resolution. —Largo Plazo (talk) 14:13, 18 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not remove maintenance templates from pages on Wikipedia without resolving the problem that the template refers to, or giving a valid reason for the removal in the edit summary. Your removal of this template does not appear constructive, and has been reverted. Thank you. لenna vecia 14:16, 18 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Adhering to Etiquette[edit]

I can see that you're becoming an active member of the Wikipedia community, and I welcome you. I want to draw your attention to a situation over at 2000–2009, where you reverted my edit. My edit, which was also a revert, included an edit summary explaining my reversion. This is always a good practice when reverting another editor's work, as it demonstrates that you are not just dismissing their efforts out of hand. Your revert of my edit contained no such explanation, and as you were reverting an edit for which a rationale was provided, it would be courteous of you to leave an explanation as well.

Beyond that, my edit reflected a consensus that has existed on this article for nearly two years. There are reasons, which can be found at extraordinary length in the archives of the article, that the consensus of the editors has been to not create multiple sections within the 2000–2009 article at this time. Before reverting again, I encourage you to read the many months of discussion which preceeded the formatting of the article in its present form.

You have done nothing wrong; we are encouraged to take bold steps in writing this project. But in being bold, we must also recognize that sometimes others will not agree with our edits, and we must give due consideration to their feelings on the matter. This only works because of consensus.

I wish you the best, and look forward to seeing more of your contributions. Cheers. Unschool (talk) 08:35, 19 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Well, I was going to revert you, but after writing this I went back to the page and found that another editor had already done so. Note that he left an edit summary explaining his actions. You appear to use edit summaries only about 10% of the time; if you use them more often it will help you work with other editors. G'day! Unschool (talk) 08:39, 19 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion of "Eras of rock"[edit]

A page you created, Eras of rock, has been tagged for deletion, as it meets one or more of the criteria for speedy deletion; specifically, it is about a real person, group of people, band, club, company, organisation, or web content, but does not indicate why its subject is important or significant.

You are welcome to contribute content which complies with our content policies and any applicable inclusion guidelines. However, please do not simply re-create the page with the same content. You may also wish to read our introduction to editing and guide to writing your first article.

Thank you. --RedHillian | Talk 22:14, 22 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

AfD nomination of Eras of rock[edit]

I have nominated Eras of rock, an article 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/Eras of rock. 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. Alexf^(talk) 22:35, 22 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome to Wikipedia. Please do not remove Articles for deletion notices from articles, or remove other people's comments in Articles for deletion debates, as you did with Eras of rock. Otherwise, it may be difficult to create consensus. If you oppose the deletion of an article, please comment at the respective page instead. Thank you. Aboutmovies (talk) 23:37, 22 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The recent edit you made to Eras of rock constitutes vandalism, and has been reverted. Please do not continue to vandalize pages; use the sandbox for testing. Thank you. King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 23:45, 22 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not vandalize pages, as you did with this edit to LGBT social movements. If you continue to do so, you will be blocked from editing. Roux-HG (talk) 03:27, 23 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

CfD nomination of Category:Ongoing trends[edit]

I have nominated Category:Ongoing trends (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs) for deletion. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at the discussion page. Thank you. [ roux ] [x] 03:35, 23 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Rock music and related articles - a supportive comment[edit]

Just a comment, because I hope that you're not discouraged from editing by all the comments above. Unlike, say, forests in Oregon, which is a topic which probably doesn't have that many active editors, an article like Rock music probably has thousands of editors who would all like to change and improve it so that it's closer to their own views. That makes it even more important than usual, in my view, that changes which have the potential to be contentious are discussed on the article talk page, so that a more robust and well referenced article can be developed through consensus. Looking through the comments above, I can see I'm agreeing with Unschool on etiquette, so I hope you can take note of the advice you're getting from everyone. Ghmyrtle (talk) 08:41, 23 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

New Wave revival[edit]

I've put a proposed deletion tag on New Wave revival. It's not because I think it's inappropriate for Wikipedia, but more that this information would be better placed on the New Wave music page, with New Wave revival made into a redirect.

Let me know if you've got any better ideas.

Chris Neville-Smith (talk) 09:34, 25 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

CfD nomination of Category:Portland, Oregon suburbs[edit]

I have nominated Category:Portland, Oregon suburbs (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs) for deletion. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at the discussion page. Thank you. Aboutmovies (talk) 06:34, 1 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I also nominated:

Category:Modernity (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs); comments at the discussion page
Category:Postmodernity (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs); comments at the discussion page
Category:Cold War fashion (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs); comments at the discussion page
Category:Postmodern fashion (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs); comments at the discussion page
Category:Fad technologies (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs) (for merger to Category:2000s fads); comments at the discussion page

— Arthur Rubin (talk) 16:13, 1 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Infobox Fashions[edit]

I'm not sure this template is useful and have started a discussion at WT:FASHION. Please contribute to the conversation before adding it to any more articles! Calliopejen1 (talk) 16:48, 1 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Place in time infobox[edit]

I'm a little confused about your addition of the "Place in time" infobox to a bunch of given name articles (here for example). Can you enlighten me? -- MarcoTolo (talk) 02:38, 3 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

TfD nomination of Template:Infobox Names[edit]

Template:Infobox Names has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for Deletion page. Thank you. — Arthur Rubin (talk) 03:15, 3 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

TfD nomination of Template:Infobox Place in Time[edit]

Template:Infobox Place in Time has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for Deletion page. Thank you. — Arthur Rubin (talk) 03:15, 3 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

CfD nomination of Category:Generation Y members[edit]

I have nominated Category:Generation Y members (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs) for deletion. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at the discussion page. Thank you. Erzsébet Báthory_{(talk|contr.)} 12:27, 3 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

CfD nomination of Category:Generation X members[edit]

I have nominated Category:Generation X members (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs) for deletion. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at the discussion page. Thank you. — Arthur Rubin (talk) 13:23, 3 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

CfD nomination of Category:Songs about the Cold War[edit]

I have nominated Category:Songs about the Cold War (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs) for deletion. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at the discussion page. Thank you. Wildhartlivie (talk) 19:25, 3 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

November 2008[edit]

Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia, adding content without citing a reliable source, as you did to Information Age, is not consistent with our policy of verifiability. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. If you are familiar with Wikipedia:Citing sources, please take this opportunity to add references to the article. Thank you. - Mdsummermsw (talk) 19:34, 3 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

TfD nomination of Template:Infobox Fashions[edit]

Template:Infobox Fashions has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for Deletion page. Thank you. — Arthur Rubin (talk) 15:28, 10 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

This looks familiar[edit]

haha... I see you have about as many deletion templates as I did when I started out on Wikipedia. But I feel that I should mention that you probrably should cite a few sources, it keeps these other guys from deleting your articles.

In regards to the Category:2000s fads page, I'm trying my best to keep it from being deleted again by providing sources on the discussion page of that article. Make sure you post your sources there so that they don't delete it.

I do however disagree on whether or not Facebook, MySpace, and Family Guy are "fads"; they are still popular now, you really cannot tell what is a fad and what isn't until you see it in retrospect. Social networking sites are not really fads because people will always use them from now on. I won't take them off, just make sure you find a source supporting it.

If however the page is nominated for deletion (AGAIN), then I will delte the stuff that is not sourced so that the page will survive, OK? See ya... (Tigerghost (talk) 17:19, 17 November 2008 (UTC))[reply]

AfD nomination of Millennial era[edit]

An article that you have been involved in editing, Millennial era, has been listed for deletion. If you are interested in the deletion discussion, please participate by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Millennial era. Thank you. Unschool (talk) 00:21, 24 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

AfD nomination of Adam Weaver[edit]

An article that you have been involved in editing, Adam Weaver, has been listed for deletion. If you are interested in the deletion discussion, please participate by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Adam Weaver. Thank you. Nsk92 (talk) 04:26, 25 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Notability of Adam Weaver[edit]

A tag has been placed on Adam Weaver requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done because the article, which appears to be about a real person, organization (band, club, company, etc.), or web content, does not indicate how or why the subject is notable: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, articles that do not indicate the subject's importance or significance may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable. If this is the first page that you have created, then you should read the guide to writing your first article.

If you think that you can assert the notability of the subject, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the article (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 confirm the subject's notability under Wikipedia guidelines.

For guidelines on specific types of articles, you may want to check out our criteria for biographies, for web sites, for bands, or for companies. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. — Arthur Rubin (talk) 17:31, 25 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Maurie Kaufmann listed at RfD[edit]

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Maurie Kaufmann. Since you had some involvement with the Maurie Kaufmann redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion (if you have not already done so). — Arthur Rubin (talk) 17:56, 25 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Lights proposal[edit]

I'm proposing upmerging all the categories related to Lights (singer) to a single category named Category:Lights (singer). They're all pretty small, and Category:Lights would be assumed by a reasonable person to be a subcategory of Category:Lighting. — Arthur Rubin (talk) 18:15, 25 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Adding generalities to articles[edit]

Thanks for experimenting with the page Bobcat on Wikipedia. Your recent edit appears to have added incorrect information, and has been reverted or removed. All information in the encyclopedia must be verifiable in a reliable published source. If you believe the information you added was correct, please cite references or sources or discuss the changes on the article's talk page before making them. Please use the sandbox for any other tests you want to do. Take a look at the welcome page if you would like to learn more about contributing to our encyclopedia. Thank you.--Tombstone (talk) 08:55, 15 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia, adding content without citing a reliable source, as you did to Ohio, is not consistent with our policy of verifiability. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. If you are familiar with Wikipedia:Citing sources, please take this opportunity to add references to the article. Thank you.--Tombstone (talk) 08:55, 15 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Deleting others' comments[edit]

It's not a good idea to delete others' comments in a WP discussion, as you did here. If I'm mistaken and you had permission to do so or something, let me know. Thanks. Good Ol’factory ^(talk) 04:23, 16 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

AFD nomination of Synthpop revival[edit]

I have nominated Synthpop revival, 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/Synthpop revival. 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. WesleyDodds (talk) 09:22, 17 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

More CfDs[edit]

See Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2008 December 17#Technology by decade. There may be others of your categories up for deletion there, as well. — Arthur Rubin (talk) 22:19, 17 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of New Years' 2010[edit]

A proposed deletion template has been added to the article New Years' 2010, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process because of the following concern:

Total speculation, no encyclopedic content, adds nothing useful to 2010s

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. Russ (talk) 12:39, 21 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Obama[edit]

Not yet. Each time you add these things, someone is reverting you. Please stop, at least until 12 noon EST as per the constitution. Thanks. ➨ ❝ЯEDVERS❞ dedicated to making a happy man very old 15:06, 20 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

No content in Category:Forests of South Dakota[edit]

Hello, this is a message from an automated bot. A tag has been placed on Category:Forests of South Dakota, by another Wikipedia user, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. The tag claims that it should be speedily deleted because Category:Forests of South Dakota has been empty for at least four days, and its only content has been links to parent categories. (CSD C1).

To contest the tagging and request that administrators wait before possibly deleting Category:Forests of South Dakota, please affix the template {{hangon}} to the page, and put a note on its talk page. If the article has already been deleted, see the advice and instructions at WP:WMD. Feel free to contact the bot operator if you have any questions about this or any problems with this bot, bearing in mind that this bot is only informing you of the nomination for speedy deletion; it does not perform any nominations or deletions itself. To see the user who deleted the page, click here CSDWarnBot (talk) 19:20, 23 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Tween (generation)[edit]

A proposed deletion template has been added to the article Tween (generation), suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process because of the following concern:

Article documenting a neologism with only one evidence of usage, which takes care of defining the term.

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. Blanchardb -^{Me•MyEars•MyMouth}- timed 16:07, 4 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

File:South.JPG listed for deletion[edit]

An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, File:South.JPG, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Ricky81682 (talk) 05:17, 18 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

March 2009 block[edit]

You have been blocked from editing Wikipedia for a period of 24 hours. For the reasons for this block, please see User_talk:Tiramisoo#March_2009_block. If you believe this block is unjustified you may contest this block by replying here on your talk page by adding the text {{unblock|your reason here}}. You may also email the blocking administrator or any administrator from this list instead, or mail unblock-en-l@mail.wikimedia.org. Good Ol’factory ^(talk) 08:32, 18 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinitely blocked[edit]

Account has now been blocked indefinitely as a sockpuppet of User:Tiramisoo. See User talk:Tiramisoo. Good Ol’factory ^(talk) 21:37, 18 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

AfD nomination of Tween (generation)[edit]

I have nominated Tween (generation), 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/Tween (generation). 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. neon white talk 21:18, 18 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

AfD nomination of Anti-fashion[edit]

An editor has nominated one or more articles which you have created or worked on, for deletion. The nominated article is Anti-fashion. We appreciate your contributions, but the nominator doesn't believe that the article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion and has explained why in his/her nomination (see also Wikipedia:Notability and "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(s) by adding your comments to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Anti-fashion. Please be sure to 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.

Please note: This is an automatic notification by a bot. I have nothing to do with this article or the deletion nomination, and can't do anything about it. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 01:07, 13 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]