User talk:Thedaywillcome3
August 2015
[edit]
Hi Thedaywillcome3. Thank you for your work on patrolling new pages and tagging for speedy deletion. I'm just letting you know that I declined your deletion request for Princess Aisha bint Faisal, a page that you tagged for speedy deletion, because the criterion you used or the reason you gave does not cover this kind of page. The reason you gave is not a valid criterion for speedy deletion, which is deliberately narrowly defined. Please take a moment to look at the suggested tasks for patrollers, criteria for speedy deletion, and particularly, the section covering non-criteria. Such pages are best tagged with proposed deletion or proposed deletion for biographies of living persons, or sent to the appropriate deletion discussion. Thanks! Beeblebrox (talk) 20:13, 4 August 2015 (UTC)
Welcome!
[edit]Hi, Thedaywillcome3. Welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Our intro page contains a lot of helpful material for new users—please check it out! If you need help, visit Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on this page, followed by your question, and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Beeblebrox (talk) 20:13, 4 August 2015 (UTC)
 | This help request has been answered. If you need more help, you can , contact the responding user(s) directly on their user talk page, or consider visiting the Teahouse. |
I'm confused why the page is any different? It doesn't have any sources?
- Firstly, it does have a reference. Secondly, being unreferenced is not among the highly specific criteria for speedy deletion, though other venues of deletion might be available if you think Wikipedia should not have an article on this person. To me, cleanup and improvement seems a better alternative. Huon (talk) 21:28, 4 August 2015 (UTC)
- I agree with Huon, but just for your information, :The other deletion processes, namely proposed deletion and deletion discussions, have different rules. Speedy deletion is only for the most obviously hopless articles, and not havng sources is explicitly not a valid reason for it. Beeblebrox (talk) 21:33, 4 August 2015 (UTC)
- Also, just rapid-firing deletion tags at an article to see what sticks [1] is not appropriate or helpful. (and by the way, deletion tags always go at the top of an article) Beeblebrox (talk) 21:38, 4 August 2015 (UTC)
- I agree with Huon, but just for your information, :The other deletion processes, namely proposed deletion and deletion discussions, have different rules. Speedy deletion is only for the most obviously hopless articles, and not havng sources is explicitly not a valid reason for it. Beeblebrox (talk) 21:33, 4 August 2015 (UTC)
No reason to be rude about it.
- I don't believe I was rude, but since you brought it up, some might consider it considerabally ruder to basically throw a temper tantrum because you din't get your way. Beeblebrox (talk) 22:10, 4 August 2015 (UTC)
How dare you. You deleted my comment because you didn't want people to see how nasty you were.
- Wow, that's just weak. Anyone can see from the page history that every edit that has removed anything from this page has been performed by you. I don't know what game you think you are playing, but it's over. Beeblebrox (talk) 17:39, 9 August 2015 (UTC)
Oh maybe I did delete it? Weird I hadn't meant to sorry about that...