User talk:Zzaffuto118/subpage

Read First

Mission Statement: This forum is designed to facilitate discussion about the appropriateness of an article tag that I either personally placed or publicly supported.

What this page is NOT:

My general talk page

A place to attack me

A place to comment about anything other then my tags.

*A place to discuss whether or not the article should be deleted. This belongs on the article's talk page!

If you can't do the above, please return to my general talk page: Feel free to attack me on my general talk page, but keep it clean and courteous.

What this page is:

A place to post justifications for pulled tags
A place to post reasons why articles nominated for deletion were not deleted
A place to post comments and suggestions to improve my patrol

For clarification, it may help to read my interpretation of Wikipedia's policies before posting. Posts that simply are opinion based, with no ground in Wikipedia policy, will be answered with a link to a policy page or a deletion. This includes posts such as "I don't agree with you because you're wrong." These posts are not helpful to improving my job or the community.

Please leave appropriate comments below. Thank you for helping make Wikipedia better!

-ZZ

Transfered Comments

Speedy Deletion Query

Hi there. I see that you've marked an article I wrote for speedy deletion (namely the article for Wu Anguo, a possibly fictional general included in the novel Romance of the Three Kingdoms). As I am new to Wikipedia, I don't understand the criteria for speedy deletion. Here is the article for Cheng Yuanzhi, which features what I see to be similar characteristics to the Wu Anguo article. Could you please explain to me why one is more important than the other so I can avoid creating unimportant articles in the future? Thanks for your help. Benjitheijneb (talk) 15:42, 6 January 2012 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Zzaffuto118 (talk • contribs) [reply]

Speedy deletion converted to PROD: Stracy Stone

Hello Zzaffuto118. I am just letting you know that I have converted the speedy deletion tag that you placed on Stracy Stone to aproposed deletion tag, because I do not believe CSD applies to the page in question. Thank you. Bryce (talk |contribs) 02:07, 5 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion contested: MAITHILI RAO MD

Hello Zzaffuto118. I am just letting you know that I contested the speedy deletion of MAITHILI RAO MD, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: The article makes a credible assertion of importance or significance, sufficient to pass A7. Thank you. Bryce (talk | contribs) 02:12, 5 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion contested: Levin M. Powell

Hello Zzaffuto118, and thanks for patrolling new pages! I am just letting you know that I contested the speedy deletion of Levin M. Powell, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: The article makes a credible assertion of importance or significance, sufficient to pass A7. You may wish to review the Criteria for Speedy Deletion before tagging further pages. Thank you. Bryce (talk | contribs) 02:13, 5 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion contested: Alexis Mateo

Why are you proposing deletion of article when I am adding references to the article? Don't you think you're jumping the gun TOO SOON?--XLR8TION (talk) 02:28, 5 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Kenny Wilkerson for deletion

I have speedily closed the Article for Deletion nomination you opened on Kenny Wilkerson. You did not specify a reason in your nomination. Also, the article was under a BLP prod and there is no need to take this article to AfD. Safiel (talk) 02:41, 5 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I just got your message to me. The tag on the page is in itself a deletion process. If the article is not sourced within ten days, it will be deleted. Since it is already under a deletion process, there is no reason to an AfD. If somebody was to source the article AND there was still a valid reason to delete, you could take it to AfD at that time, but as long as it is under a BLP prod tag, an AfD nomination is unneeded. Safiel(talk) 02:44, 5 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Declined speedy deletions

Hi Zzaffuto118. It looks as if today you have tagged a number of articles for speedy deletion that don't actually meet the criteria. I've just declined two more of them myself. Can I suggest that you familiarize yourself with WP:CSD before adding more deletion tags? Keep in mind that speedy deletion is just for the most non-contentious deletions, and they need to meet very specific criteria. Thanks. Paul Erik ^{(talk)(contribs)} 03:56, 5 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Talkback

Hello, Zzaffuto118. You have new messages at B.wilson's talk page.
Message added 12:31, 5 January 2012 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.[reply]

Bryce (talk | contribs) 12:31, 5 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Cabriana Sea Skiffs

Hi. Could you please userfy this article for me? Thank you. Candleabracadabra (talk) 16:10, 5 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent edits

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 could also click on the signature button or 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 they said it. Thank you. --SineBot (talk) 18:57, 5 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Tiang language

Why would you try and delete an article about a language? Did you even try to do a search on it first?LuciferWildCat (talk) 19:03, 5 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Well your wrong. All languages are notable. So you have no grounds for proposing deletion. I don't have to convince anyone that it is notable as all languages are automatically notable, as are ethnic groups, countries, rivers, oceans, species, high schools, cities, etc. I did go ahead and removed the tag as it is my perogative to do so. Don't drag this to AfD please. And I take you that you didn't even do a search on it did you?LuciferWildCat (talk) 19:16, 5 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with Luciferwildcat on this. Any language described in a reliable linguistic source can be presumed to be notable. I advise you to be much more cautious in proposing articles for deletion. Thank you. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 19:20, 5 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

You can't because it would fail and you clearly have no idea what makes certain topics automatically notable. I only have problems with one editor, and that editor has problems with dozens of others so I fail to see how that is my fault. No I don't have to prove "it matters" if contested I just have to prove a language exists. Ethnologue is the gold standard for languages. I really don't think its poorly written, there is very little information on this topic readily available. Also most start articles are not in their best shape and that is no reason to delete. Does English or Chinese or Cherokee sound unnotable to you too? Think about it. Your contradicting yourself, you told me I could not remove it, now you say I can. You obviously should read up on proposed deletion tags, and notability, because you are lacking in your information for that. If you don't have time then you should not spend any time on making spurious edits. You should not act so prematurely. Have a good day too.LuciferWildCat(talk) 19:34, 5 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Nor am I, I just did not want a extremely notable article deleted by someone that was very misinformed and sophomoric in their actions. I know you must have a delicious head but I wasn't biting it off, so much personality and intonation is lost in cyberspace. No harm intended from my end whatsoever. I highly suggest you go over the notability criteria and see which subjects are always notable, I gave you a shorthand list. For those types of articles, an additional search would be helpful. Also take a look at the creator's edit history and don't be so premature. Cause honestly premature babies are gross! Oh and baby I am not bullying you, if I were I would have been very mean but you have not engendered my wrath and few people are able to do that. Love you. Happy new year.LuciferWildCat (talk) 19:52, 5 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Getting involved

Hello,

I see that you are a new editor and have gotten involved in a very important area of work here on Wikipedia. Welcome to the project, and I hope that you will continue to contribute. When you want to comment on another editor's talk page, please start a new section. Your comment is now part of recommendations from SuggestBot on my talk page. I feel justified in commenting on any issue at any time as long as I believe that I have something useful to say. Every documented human language is notable without exception, even those spoken by a few hundred people on an island. There is no way that an article about a language will be deleted unless the article is a hoax. Please do not prod articles about inherently notable topics, but feel free to add a citation needed tag or something appropriate. Even better, search for sources and add them yourself. Thank you very much.Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 20:01, 5 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion on Komathampatti

Hello, Zzaffuto118, I noticed that you tagged Komathampatti for speedy deletion under criterion A7. I have contested the speedy deletion because the article's topic is neither a real person, individual animal(s), organization, or web content, hence it is outside of the scope of A7 (see A7 scope for more). Thanks, Quasi human | Talk 21:41, 5 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Sheldon Garon deletion request

You have added a deletion request to the article I added on the academic Sheldon Garon. I am a new Wikipedian, so please be gentle! I have re-edited the article and am beginning to add additional citations. I would like to remove your deletion tag - are there any other sources you think should be listed? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rogerferris (talk • contribs) 23:45, 6 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Talkback

Hello, Zzaffuto118. You have new messages at Abhijay's talk page.
Message added 05:58, 7 January 2012 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.[reply]

Abhijay (☎ Talk) (✐ Deeds) 05:58, 7 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Contested prod

I have contested your prod of How You Like Me Now?, have explained on the talk page. CRRays Head90 | ^{We Believe!} 21:04, 7 January 2012 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Zzaffuto118 (talk • contribs) [reply]

Robert Gomis

Hey it's me again. Your nomination of deletion of an article based upon a living person is bound to be rejected as the article maintains a reliable reference and some introduction about it with a few spelling errors. Under Wikipedia policy, all biographies of living persons created after March 18, 2010, must have at least one source that directly supports material in the article, which has been done in the article tagged, despite not being in English. The creator might not have been intending to write more but you cannot know this. Bearing in mind with some of your recent tagging of articles for deletion, I think you need to take a break from patrolling new pages until you are a bit more thorough with the policies. Please read up on the policies again before you do any more tagging, and if you don't understand something, don't hesitate to ask me on my talk page. Abhijay (☎ Talk) (✐ Deeds) 12:09, 8 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Workplace Health Programs for State Employees in USA

Hello, Zzaffuto118. You have new messages at M1rtyn's talk page.
Message added M1rtyn (talk) 07:01, 9 January 2012 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.[reply]

Untargeted Merge at Italian Air Force ranks

I rolled back your {{Merge}} suggestion at Italian Air Force ranks because you gave no target and no explanation that could have been used to determine where you intended to merge to. Mark Hurd (talk) 07:45, 19 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]