User talk:Beta m

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Hello Beta m and welcome to Wikipedia! Hope you like it here, and stick around.

Here are some tips to help you get started:

Good luck!

ASIN?[edit]

Please see my question at Talk:Amazon Standard Identification Number in regard to your recent edit at Perfection of Wisdom. -- कुक्कुरोवाच|Talk‽ 08:07, 4 Jul 2004 (UTC)

Hi. Please remember to write in complete sentences. Check out the Wikipedia:Manual of Style for more tips. Cheers, -- Infrogmation 16:53, 27 Aug 2004 (UTC)

I'm not sure about the sentence you added to the human artilce. "Many of these religions and spiritualities also view humans in a different fascion, in Buddhism, for example, humans are all sentient beings in Human realm." Different from what? - Nat Krause 15:41, 29 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Different from the way the word "Human" is normally used. So somebody can be a human (at least in some traditions or in theory) and share absolutely no genetical relation to a homo sapien, at the same time somebody with the homo sapien body might not be in a Human realm. Beta m (talk)
That's an interesting point. However, your addition to the human article doesn't make it very clearly, and the human realm article doesn't mention it, and I've never heard it before, either (although it sounds plausible on the face of it). What's your source on this? - Nat Krause 16:22, 29 Sep 2004 (UTC)
Well "Tibetan Book of Living and Dying" would mention it, and also probably any other Buddhist text discussing Bardo and Samsara, if you want websites... at this point i can only find this [1], now it's not exactly what i was looking for, but you can still see that Sravaka-yana (Spiritual Discipleship) is a separate realm, now the person in that realm can still appear homo sapien biologically (although there will be some changes on the level of shakras). Beta m (talk)
Interesting. It appears that ultimately, the description that website gives is from the Lotus Sutra. It brings up an interesting question, though: is a Sravaka really genetically Homo sapiens? Can a Sravaka be said to possess genes? - Nat Krause 07:44, 30 Sep 2004 (UTC)
OK, i have two things to say to that. One is this discussion is pushing my knowledge of the issue to its limits, therefore i will probably need to consult a person i know who has in fact received Mahayana lineage (sp?) teaching, and who is a Boddhisatva, and who will know the propper answer to this; another one is that even if genetics do not exist on that level... i would guess that would probably not be needed on that stage, Human realm is still defined by doubt rather than genetics, therefore, genes, although play significan role in the definition of the human from the perspective of science, will not from the Buddhist perspective. But i don't want this to get into an argument where i don't know all the facts, so i'll (asap) get ahold of an "expert" q;-) Beta m (talk)
Well, just to clarify, my point is, is there a difference between "doubt" and "genes" or are they different ways of describing the same thing? Further, the article isn't necessarily just about a scientific view of humanity, so it's not necessarily necessary to distinguish the Buddhist view as distinct from everything else in the article. - Nat Krause 08:28, 30 Sep 2004 (UTC)
There is definately difference. But once again i will come back to it... probably tomorrow (if i'll get ahold of my "expert"). Beta m (talk)
It ends up that my edit to the Human page was... well misleading and incorrect. However, somebody has already removed it with the simple reference to Human realm. I stand corrected. Beta m (talk)

Article Licensing[edit]

Hi, I've started a drive to get users to multi-license all of their contributions that they've made to either (1) all U.S. state, county, and city articles or (2) all articles, using the Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike (CC-by-sa) v1.0 and v2.0 Licenses or into the public domain if they prefer. The CC-by-sa license is a true free documentation license that is similar to Wikipedia's license, the GFDL, but it allows other projects, such as WikiTravel, to use our articles. Since you are among the top 2000 Wikipedians by edits, I was wondering if you would be willing to multi-license all of your contributions or at minimum those on the geographic articles. Over 90% of people asked have agreed. For More Information:

To allow us to track those users who muli-license their contributions, many users copy and paste the "{{DualLicenseWithCC-BySA-Dual}}" template into their user page, but there are other options at Template messages/User namespace. The following examples could also copied and pasted into your user page:

Option 1
I agree to [[Wikipedia:Multi-licensing|multi-license]] all my contributions, with the exception of my user pages, as described below:
{{DualLicenseWithCC-BySA-Dual}}

OR

Option 2
I agree to [[Wikipedia:Multi-licensing|multi-license]] all my contributions to any [[U.S. state]], county, or city article as described below:
{{DualLicenseWithCC-BySA-Dual}}

Or if you wanted to place your work into the public domain, you could replace "{{DualLicenseWithCC-BySA-Dual}}" with "{{MultiLicensePD}}". If you only prefer using the GFDL, I would like to know that too. Please let me know what you think at my talk page. It's important to know either way so no one keeps asking. -- Ram-Man (comment| talk)

Please see Wikipedia:No personal attacks. RickK 10:09, Feb 3, 2005 (UTC)

Read the policy, changed the page. It would be nice if you don't {{vfd}} page right away, but actually try to contact the author and possibly resolve the conflict. I do understand that we are all Wikipedians, and i might have been a little hot to start listing people, but you must admit that it was possible for me to take a personal offence to what you have done and to just start going around blanking pages... Please look at my page and at my contributions, it is my belief that i did in fact contribute to Wikipedia enough not to be treated like that. I'll post the copy of this on your user page. Beta m (talk)

Signing[edit]

I thought I'd let you know that you forgot to sign your vote on the Wikipedia:Votes for deletion/Chinese ethnocentrism page. Mel Etitis (Μελ Ετητης) 10:21, 3 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Thanks Beta m (talk)


Responses to Survey Answers[edit]

Really? Why the Swiss? That is odd. Would you happen to know off hand where I could find this information?

BTW - I saw on your talk page that you have anarcho-primitivism listed as a page you would like to contribute to. The article is currently lacking any real in-depth knowledge and has recently been edited a good deal by folks who admit they know little or nothing about it. There was also an attempt to merge it with primitive communism, which I aborted. Anyway, you might want to give it a look in the near future as it needs to be fleshed out. Kev 22:52, 5 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Hi Beta m— There is an interesting discussion regarding paniq over on VfD. I was hoping you could review the article and perhaps contribute a vote? —RaD Man (talk) 17:02, 11 Feb 2005 (UTC)


Animal testing[edit]

You should assume good faith, Beta. There was some kind of editing glitch. I found vandalism, reverted it, checked my edit, and saw the vandalism was still there. I therefore deleted it again, using delete instead of revert. There are a lot of weird revert and save glitches going on today. SlimVirgin 18:46, Feb 28, 2005 (UTC)

As far as I can make out, Beta M made an edit to the page without noticing the vandalism; SlimVirgin was in the process of reverting the vandalism, and an edit conflict produced the weird result. Mel Etitis (Μελ Ετητης) 18:48, 28 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Thanks, Mel. The same thing happened to me a couple of weeks ago at Anti-Semitism, where I now have this delightful contribution attributed to my name, when in fact I was reverting it. Beta, I'm normally not the sort of editor who would add "I kill my mums rabbits for tea," but if I had, I'd have used the apostrophe. SlimVirgin 19:04, Feb 28, 2005 (UTC)
Hah! If I were the sort of person who wrote “lol” I'd have written it now. Mel Etitis (Μελ Ετητης) 19:10, 28 Feb 2005 (UTC)
I did assume good faith, after all you did revert it, my first thought was that somebody was using your login name. It can happen if you were to use a public computer and forgot to logout. My intention was to sound confused not harsh, if i have failed to convey what i was trying to say, i'm sorry. Beta m (talk)
No worries, Beta. SlimVirgin 06:03, Mar 1, 2005 (UTC)

Italy and bicontinental[edit]

Why did you add Category:Bicontinetal country to Italy article? It is a single continent country, as far as I know.--Panairjdde

Commons images not CSD eligible[edit]

Hi. I have noticed you have placed a number of speedy delete requests on images that have been copied to Commons. By policy, such images cannot be speedy deleted. Please make such image deletions requests on Wikipedia:Images and media for deletion where they will be deleted in 7 days unless objections are raised. The only possible exceptions to this policy are those where you have uploaded to the English Wiki, no one has made any changes to the image description page and the image is not being used in an article. Thanks. RedWolf 03:46, Mar 31, 2005 (UTC)

HIV: Epidemic - Pandemic[edit]

Hi, i'm not being picky, just thought you should know this litte fact since you've mentioned it when editing Africa article. HIV is not an epidemic because it's global, and as such qualifies to be a pandemic. Beta m (talk)

Thanks for the terminology check ... we should get the terms right. Would HIV/AIDS then be considered epidemic in a geographical region (such as Africa) but pandemic overall?
Courtland 18:40, 2005 Apr 5 (UTC)
I don't know everything about the issue, but from what i understand, HIV1 is pandemic, while HIV2 is epidemic (since there's been no cases outside of Africa so far. Beta m (talk)

Signature[edit]

Hi there! In the interest of reducing server load, it is discouraged to use a template as your signature (e.g. {{user:beta m/sig}}). You can click on 'preferences' to change your signature to your heart's content. Yours, Radiant_* 09:30, May 23, 2005 (UTC)

Université de Montréal[edit]

In answer to your question at Wikipedia:Categories for deletion/Log/2005 May 21, the university's website refers to the university as the Université de Montréal even on the English version of its site and its English-language press releases. - Cafemusique 10:26, 23 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

VfD for Genesis 1:2[edit]

Beta_m, at first I thought you cast two votes on this VfD. The edit history for that VfD has fluctuated, which seems to randomly omit or re-attribute edits. I'm not sure why that's happening. My apologies for having made the claim on the VfD that you voted twice. Mindmatrix 21:35, 26 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Boilerplate votes[edit]

I suggest you review your vote at Wikipedia:Votes for deletion/Alexander MacGregor. What's being discussed there are two articles: a somewhat-slanderous biography, and a possibly-slanderous article on a vocational institute with little verifiable information about it. Your templated vote about witch hunts is looking rather silly there. --Carnildo 07:37, 27 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

  • It is generally frowned upon to use templates for voting, because it leads to people voting based on priciples rather than based on the article's merit. If you must use that template for voting, at least put a "subst:" in front of your vote because otherwise someone might change your template to read "Delete. An utterly non-notable school. Schools have no place in Wikipedia and this one in particular is a dreadful article and must be deleted." Suddenly all your keep votes will have turned to delete votes... Sjakkalle 09:53, 27 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Redirects[edit]

I saw you've been changing some redirects around. I'm not sure why, but I saw that you're doing it partly wrong. In a direct link you can link to a section, i. e. User talk:Beta m#Redirects would link to this section. However you can't link to sections with redirects - they only go to the top of the article. If a section is worth directly linking to there's a chance it's worth it's own article. If not, just redirect to the article and hope the reader finds the right section. Cheers, -Willmcw 22:49, July 27, 2005 (UTC)

It still makes sense to create section redirects. One of these years, they may actually work. --Carnildo 23:25, 27 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks, Willmcw, i didn't know that, but as Carnildo said "One of these years" they just might work. In fact when i'll get some time i'll put it a suggestion for that fix. Beta m (talk)

Lolicon[edit]

Hi. How does lolicon fit in category:Childlove? 24 at 18:23, 2 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Anarchism[edit]

Are these links not accessible already as standard weblinks? if not .. i apologise as i was concentrating on the main body of the article --max rspct 17:49, 7 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

np, peace Beta m (talk)

Freenet[edit]

I find your addition of freenet links inadmissible. I admit that I may be wrong. Please defend your position at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents. mikka (t) 18:49, 8 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Since I seem to be being overridden, please supply your template with a link to the page that gives instruction of establishing freenet access, including alternative ways, mentioned at the "incidents" noticeboard. mikka (t) 20:55, 8 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Yikes! It seems that I have stumbled into something bigger than I imagined. I saw your freenet link at Subvertizing, felt uncomfortable about its inclusion (it uses technology that is not yet generally adopted or stable) and proposed that the link be deleted. I came here out of courtesy and find that you are inserting such links as part of a "campaign" which is itself only a proposal. Please would you consider waiting until your proposal becomes a guideline before continuing to enact your campaign. —Theo (Talk) 23:27, 9 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

This sounds reasonable, i will not add any more links to the articles until some sort of consensus or agreement is reached. You don't happen to know wikipedia well enough for me to bring this discussion to attention of people who might be interested in it, do you? I just think that the discussion on Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents#User:Beta_m_and_his_freenet_spamming isn't trully useful, since most ppl don't eve know about that place. Thank you for being polite. Beta m (talk)
You could try to solicit comments by posting a message to WikiEN-L. Before doing that, however, I suggest that you move your policy proposal out of your user space into the Wikipedia namespace with the template "Proposed". (And on another matter, please do not use a transcluded page as your signature; it places an unnecessary load on the servers, which may be free to users but still involve costs to the Foundation.) —Theo (Talk) 10:24, 10 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Sig[edit]

Hey there, your sig seems a little broken, for example on Template_talk:Europe it breaks the vote count because it starts on a new line. Could you fix it please, if you're still around? Cheers, Joolz 15:01, 18 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I'm nominating "Empanda (disambig)" for deletion[edit]

Please note: I am nominating Empanda (disambig) for deletion.
You are shown in the history as having edited this page.
If you wish to object, check the details by clicking the link above.

Regards, JohnI 10:07, 6 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Non-free use disputed for Image:NCH (logo).gif[edit]

Warning sign This file may be deleted.

Thanks for uploading Image:NCH (logo).gif. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read carefully the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content and then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our Criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 04:59, 5 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

A tag has been placed on Arthritis Research Campaign, 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. Videmus Omnia 03:47, 12 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion of Action Research (charity)[edit]

A tag has been placed on Action Research (charity), requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia per CSD g11.

Under the criteria for speedy deletion, articles that do not meet basic Wikipedia criteria may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as an appropriate article, and if you can indicate why the subject of this article is appropriate, you may contest the tagging. To do this, add {{hangon}} on the top of the article 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 its subject's notability under the guidelines.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, 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 page's talk page explaining your position. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself. Ten Pound Hammer(Broken clamshellsOtter chirps) 23:45, 27 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion of Migraine Trust[edit]

A tag has been placed on Migraine Trust, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done for the following reason:

Dosen't give a complete amount of infomation to help

Under the criteria for speedy deletion, articles that do not meet basic Wikipedia criteria may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as an appropriate article, and if you can indicate why the subject of this article is appropriate, you may contest the tagging. To do this, add {{hangon}} on the top of the page 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 its subject's notability under the 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.Ludds (talk) 00:37, 26 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

AfD nomination of Action for Blind People[edit]

An editor has nominated Action for Blind People, an article on which you have worked or that you created, for deletion. 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 "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 by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Action for Blind People and 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. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 18:59, 31 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image copyright problem with Image:African Anarchism (cover).jpeg[edit]

Thanks for uploading Image:African Anarchism (cover).jpeg. You've indicated that the image is being used under a claim of fair use, but you have not provided an adequate explanation for why it meets Wikipedia's requirements for such images. In particular, for each page the image is used on, the image must have an explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page. Can you please check

  • That there is a non-free use rationale on the image's escription page for each article the image is used in.
  • That every article it is used on is linked to from its description page.

This is an automated notice by FairuseBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. --23:25, 7 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image (Image:Zabalaza Books.gif)[edit]

⚠

Thanks for uploading Image:Zabalaza Books.gif. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Skier Dude (talk) 22:52, 15 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

File permission problem with File:Zabalaza journal.gif[edit]

File Copyright problem
File Copyright problem

Thanks for uploading File:Zabalaza journal.gif. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file agreed to license it under the given license.

If you created this media entirely yourself but have previously published it elsewhere (especially online), please either

  • make a note permitting reuse under the GFDL or another acceptable free license (see this list) at the site of the original publication; or
  • Send an email from an address associated with the original publication to permissions-en@wikimedia.org, stating your ownership of the material and your intention to publish it under a free license. You can find a sample permission letter here.

If you did not create it entirely yourself, please ask the person who created the file to take one of the two steps listed above, or if the owner of the file has already given their permission to you via email, please forward that email to permissions-en@wikimedia.org.

If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Non-free content, use a tag such as {{non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:Image copyright tags#Fair use, and add a rationale justifying the file's use on the article or articles where it is included. See Wikipedia:Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have provided evidence that their copyright owners have agreed to license their works under the tags you supplied, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link. Files lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Jay32183 (talk) 23:17, 4 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I have nominated Secret Plot, 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/Secret Plot (2nd nomination). 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. Raymie Humbert (local radar | current conditions) 01:46, 17 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Diabetes UK[edit]

A proposed deletion template has been added to the article Diabetes UK, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process because of the following concern:

Unsourced No attempts to bring it to Wiki standards

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. Afaprof01 (talk) 16:26, 4 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The article Back-Up Trust has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Charity lacks significant coverage - fails WP:ORG, un-referenced for over 2 years.

While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{dated prod}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. The speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Codf1977 (talk) 09:08, 22 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.

You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

A tag has been placed on Migraine Action Association, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G11 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page seems to be unambiguous advertising which 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 guidelines on spam and Wikipedia:FAQ/Business for more information.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hang on}} to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion, or "db", tag; if no such tag exists, then the page is no longer a speedy delete candidate and adding a hang-on tag is unnecessary), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page 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 page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, you can contact one of these administrators to request that the administrator userfy the page or email a copy to you. MrOllie (talk) 16:36, 7 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The article Hacker (magazine) has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

No sources, and no indication of notability.

While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles 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 article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. The speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. JamesBWatson (talk) 14:44, 24 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

A tag has been placed on File:Anarchism in relation to Libertarian Socialism.jpeg requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section F1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the image is an unused redundant copy (all pixels the same or scaled down) of an image in the same file format, which is on Wikipedia (not on Commons), and all inward links have been updated.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hang on}} to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion, or "db", tag; if no such tag exists, then the page is no longer a speedy delete candidate and adding a hang-on tag is unnecessary), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page 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 page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Markcoulter50 (talk) 22:19, 21 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Bicontinental countries[edit]

Category:Bicontinental countries, which you created, has been nominated for possible 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. DexDor (talk) 06:42, 26 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Chechnya Film Festival for deletion[edit]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Chechnya Film Festival 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/Chechnya Film Festival 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 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. Boleyn (talk) 20:04, 1 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.

You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

A tag has been placed on Cancer Prevention Research Trust 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 an organization or company, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please read more about what is generally accepted as notable.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. ansh666 04:03, 25 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination for deletion of Template:User temporarily inactive[edit]

Template:User temporarily inactive has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 09:54, 9 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination for deletion of Template:User temporarily inactive[edit]

Template:User temporarily inactive has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 16:39, 29 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of New Approaches to Cancer[edit]

The article New Approaches to Cancer has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Completely unreferenced and devoid of useful content

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles 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 article 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. Rathfelder (talk) 22:15, 24 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

A tag has been placed on Empanda (disambiguation) requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G6 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is an orphaned disambiguation page which either

  • disambiguates two or fewer extant Wikipedia pages and whose title ends in "(disambiguation)" (i.e., there is a primary topic); or
  • disambiguates no (zero) extant Wikipedia pages, regardless of its title.

Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such pages may be deleted at any time. Please see the disambiguation page guidelines for more information.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. PamD 10:47, 17 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect SDRT. Since you had some involvement with the SDRT redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. Stefan2 (talk) 13:48, 27 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The article Anarchist Prisoners' Legal Aid Network has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Unsourced for seven years. No depth of coverage in reliable, secondary sources. No suitable redirect targets.

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. czar 21:24, 4 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Meningitis Trust for deletion[edit]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Meningitis Trust 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/Meningitis Trust 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 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. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 06:47, 6 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Natural Medicines Society for deletion[edit]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Natural Medicines Society 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/Natural Medicines Society 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 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. KylieTastic (talk) 20:01, 23 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Diabetes UK for deletion[edit]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Diabetes UK 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/Diabetes UK 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. SITH (talk) 16:27, 14 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination for deletion of Template:AnarchismOpenTask[edit]

Template:AnarchismOpenTask has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Steel1943 (talk) 17:19, 14 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Allergy UK for deletion[edit]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Allergy UK 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/Allergy UK 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.

SL93 (talk) 01:36, 20 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]