User talk:Pnpointer
Speedy deletion of ARC Diversified[edit]
A tag has been placed on ARC Diversified 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 company or corporation, 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 companies and corporations.
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. NAHID 18:35, 18 May 2008 (UTC)
A tag has been placed on Pat Pointer, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article seems to be blatant advertising that only promotes a company, product, group, service or person and would need to be fundamentally rewritten in order to become an encyclopedia article. Please read the general criteria for speedy deletion, particularly item 11, as well as the guidelines on spam.
If you can indicate why the subject of this article is not blatant advertising, you may contest the tagging. To do this, please add {{hangon}} on the top of Pat Pointer and leave a note on the article's talk page explaining your position. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would help make it encyclopedic, as well as adding any citations from reliable sources to ensure that the article will be verifiable. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. brewcrewer (yada, yada) 05:31, 19 May 2008 (UTC)
AfD nomination of ARC Diversified[edit]
I have nominated ARC Diversified, 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/ARC Diversified. 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. Do you want to opt out of receiving this notice? ЭLСОВВОLД talk 15:01, 22 May 2008 (UTC)
Just wanted to drop you a quick note concerning the ARC Diversified piece. Personally, I though you did a great job with article. Regarding the Afd I would not worry too much about it for a couple of reasons. The first is that I believe that Notability has been established. Especially under organizations and companies and we pointed other editors to the source where they can review. Second, the piece is cited and referenced from reliable – creditable and secondary sources. Finally, I believe it is well written – informative and an interesting piece. Worst case scenario is that consensus does not agree with our opinions and the piece is deleted. If that happens, you can have the closing administrator save a copy of the article to your discussion page to work-on and you can repost after a month. If you have any questions or need help with anything, just drop me a line. And once again, nice work. ShoesssS Talk 19:13, 22 May 2008 (UTC)
Arc Diversified[edit]
Thanks for your support on the ARC Diversified add. What is your general feeling about it's inclusion? It is still up for discussion it appears. (Pnpointer (talk) 14:39, 30 May 2008 (UTC))
- Hey Pnpointer, you are very welcome. As I stated earlier, I think you did a great job on the piece. Both from its original conception up to and including how it stands at this moment! Regarding my personal opinion with regards to the Afd of the article. I believe enough experienced and trustworthy editors have expressed valid – creditable and reliable Keep arguments that this piece will be a strong Keep. However, just remember, the process is about gathering consensus, not votes. The closing administrator is not going OK we have 15 Keep votes and 14 Delete votes, therefore it is a Keep or vise versa. Rather the administrator looks to the reasons why an editor expressed a keep or delete opinion and weights the validity of that opinion. So always remember, when involved in these types of situations, give a reasoning why you expressed a Keep or Delete – Support or Oppose. It goes a lot further than the individual you responds with “…per nominator”. In the mean time – take care – great job – and hopefully this is not the last time I see you around here. ShoesssS Talk 15:02, 30 May 2008 (UTC)
- Comment - Figured I give you a heads-up. The Afd closed as Keep. Again nice job. Further more, as I stated above, hopefully this is not the last time we see you here. Good luck in all you do. ShoesssS Talk 01:50, 31 May 2008 (UTC)
- Hey Pnpointer, you are very welcome. As I stated earlier, I think you did a great job on the piece. Both from its original conception up to and including how it stands at this moment! Regarding my personal opinion with regards to the Afd of the article. I believe enough experienced and trustworthy editors have expressed valid – creditable and reliable Keep arguments that this piece will be a strong Keep. However, just remember, the process is about gathering consensus, not votes. The closing administrator is not going OK we have 15 Keep votes and 14 Delete votes, therefore it is a Keep or vise versa. Rather the administrator looks to the reasons why an editor expressed a keep or delete opinion and weights the validity of that opinion. So always remember, when involved in these types of situations, give a reasoning why you expressed a Keep or Delete – Support or Oppose. It goes a lot further than the individual you responds with “…per nominator”. In the mean time – take care – great job – and hopefully this is not the last time I see you around here. ShoesssS Talk 15:02, 30 May 2008 (UTC)
File copyright problem with File:LitePak systems Econergy.jpg[edit]
Thank you for uploading File:LitePak systems Econergy.jpg. However, it currently is missing information on its copyright status. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously. It may be deleted soon, unless we can determine the license and the source of the file. If you know this information, then you can add a copyright tag to the 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. FASTILYsock(TALK) 21:24, 17 April 2010 (UTC)
File copyright problem with File:Stephen cochran in Iraq.jpg[edit]
Thank you for uploading File:Stephen cochran in Iraq.jpg. However, it currently is missing information on its copyright status. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously. It may be deleted soon, unless we can determine the license and the source of the file. If you know this information, then you can add a copyright tag to the 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 created in your upload log.
If you have any questions, please feel free to ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thanks again for your cooperation. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 14:05, 4 May 2010 (UTC)
December 2011[edit]
Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to contribute to Wikipedia, at least one of your recent edits, such as the one you made to Lindsay Lohan, did not appear to be constructive and has been reverted or removed. Please use the sandbox for any test edits you would like to make, and read the welcome page to learn more about contributing constructively to this encyclopedia. The reverted edit can be found here. nprice (talk) 00:58, 12 December 2011 (UTC)
Blocked[edit]
{{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}, but you should read the guide to appealing blocks first. —Kww(talk) 01:14, 12 December 2011 (UTC)
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) 13:48, 24 November 2015 (UTC)
The file File:LitePak Econergy.jpg has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:
unused, low-res, no obvious 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.
This bot DID NOT nominate any file(s) for deletion; please refer to the page history of each individual file for details. Thanks, FastilyBot (talk) 01:02, 22 November 2019 (UTC)
