User talk:Danieltroy

Notability of Flim (music)

A tag has been placed on Flim (music), requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done because the article appears to be about a person, group of people, band, club, company, or web content, 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 assert the subject's importance or significance may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable.

If you think that you can assert the notability of the subject, you may contest the deletion. To do this, add {{hangon}} on the top of the page (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag) 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 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. Realkyhick 20:21, 29 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Murphy 771

A proposed deletion template has been added to the article Murphy 771, 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. Also, please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. 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. If you agree with the deletion of the article, and you are the only person who has made substantial edits to the page, please add {{db-author}} to the top of Murphy 771. CastAStone /^/(talk) 23:47, 2 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

License tagging for Image:Flim.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Flim.jpg. You don't seem to have indicated the license status of the image. Wikipedia uses a set of image copyright tags to indicate this information; to add a tag to the image, select the appropriate tag from this list, click on this link, then click "Edit this page" and add the tag to the image's description. If there doesn't seem to be a suitable tag, the image is probably not appropriate for use on Wikipedia.

For help in choosing the correct tag, or for any other questions, leave a message on Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. Thank you for your cooperation. --ImageTaggingBot (talk) 19:06, 12 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

November 2009

Please do not replace Wikipedia pages with blank content, as you did to File:Joe McStravick - Director.jpg. Blank pages are harmful to Wikipedia because they have a tendency to confuse readers. If it is a duplicate article, please redirect it to an appropriate existing page. If the page has been vandalized, please revert it to the last legitimate version. If you feel that the content of a page is inappropriate, please edit the page and replace it with appropriate content. If you believe there is no hope for the page, please see the deletion policy for how to proceed. AruN_KumaR TalK 15:55, 15 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hai....Your Page blanking

Seems you uploaded a new version of the image...Then do not blank the existing image page...Pls apply it for deletion...Thanks.. AruN_KumaR TalK 16:00, 15 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Joe McStravick for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Joe McStravick 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/Joe McStravick 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 good 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 template from the top of the article. CharlieDelta (talk) 08:19, 4 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

File:Joe McStravick - Director.jpg listed for discussion

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Joe McStravick - Director.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for discussion. Please see the discussion to see why it has been listed (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry). Feel free to add your opinion on the matter below the nomination. Thank you. Calliopejen1 (talk) 04:26, 5 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

File:Flim.jpg listed for discussion

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Flim.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for discussion. Please see the discussion to see why it has been listed (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry). Feel free to add your opinion on the matter below the nomination. Thank you. Calliopejen1 (talk) 04:26, 5 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Mona on Darkening Ground

The article Mona on Darkening Ground has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Non-notable short story. No reliable sources are provided in the article to establish notability, and I have been able to find anything other than mirrors of this article.

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}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion.Rorshacma (talk) 17:39, 22 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Murphy 771

The article Murphy 771 has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

No substantial published reliable sources found that are not directly connected to the film & IMDB.

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}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. ww2censor (talk) 23:05, 18 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Murphy 771 for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Murphy 771 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/Murphy 771 until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, 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. Guliolopez (talk) 00:13, 26 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Tired Eyes (short film)

The article Tired Eyes (short film) has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Non-notable short-film with zero reviews, coverage, awards or other indicators of notability under WP:NFILM or WP:GNG. WP:COI and WP:PROMO overtones abound.

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}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Guliolopez (talk) 00:20, 26 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Room to Let (2003 film)

The article Room to Let (2003 film) has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Non-notable amateur short-film which, though it claims to be "award winning", is supported by no references that support this or otherwise establish notability. For example, the article claims that the film received a "highly commended" at the 2006 Guernsey Lily International Film Festival. However, in looking at the Wayback Machine's archive for the website for these awards, it is clear that this is a very (very) small amateur short-film festival, in which even the "top 5 entries" receive just "£150 and a certificate". Which is so far from the "major award" expectations of WP:NFILM as to be laughable. And, at that, the subject didn't even finish in the top 5. Instead getting just "Highly Commended". A certificate seemingly handed out to "all remaining finalists". Anyway, this subject is another promotional piece from the COI editor who created WP entries for every one of his amateur films. The rest of which are all deleted. This one only remaining because the claims of "award winning" remained unchallenged. Not worth cluttering up AfD with this obviously NN puffpiece.

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}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Guliolopez (talk) 02:10, 18 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]