User talk:Toussaint

This user may have left Wikipedia. Toussaint has not edited Wikipedia since November 22, 2011. As a result, any requests made here may not receive a response. If you are seeking assistance, you may need to approach someone else.

Archives

Archive 1 Archive 2 Archive 3 Archive 4

Hello. Your account has been granted the "reviewer" userright, allowing you to review other users' edits on certain flagged pages. Pending changes, also known as flagged protection, will be commencing a two-month trial at approximately 23:00, 2010 June 15 (UTC).

Reviewers can review edits made by users who are not autoconfirmed to articles placed under flagged protection. Flagged protection is applied to only a small number of articles, similarly to how semi-protection is applied but in a more controlled way for the trial.

When reviewing, edits should be accepted if they are not obvious vandalism or BLP violations, and not clearly problematic in light of the reason given for protection (see Wikipedia:Reviewing process). More detailed documentation and guidelines can be found here.

If you do not want this userright, you may ask any administrator to remove it for you at any time. Courcelles (talk) 20:38, 15 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

A tag has been placed on Nahuatl Wikipedia 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 web content, 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 see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable, as well as our subject-specific notability guideline for web content. You may also wish to consider using a Wizard to help you create articles - see the Article Wizard.

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 - if no such tag exists then the page is no longer a speedy delete candidate and adding a hangon 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. Lastly, please note that if the page does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that they userfy the page or have a copy emailed to you. — Gavia immer (talk) 21:29, 15 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The section you added should be made into its own article and instead merely summarized on the town page. --Shuki (talk) 21:34, 20 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Shalom, The article is now up. Thanks for the tip. --Toussaint (talk) 22:20, 20 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The article Ilê Pérola Negra has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Non-notable, unsourced

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. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 17:55, 1 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I have nominated Matthew Vanderpool, 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/Matthew Vanderpool. 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 (t • c) 03:55, 4 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The article List of Nigerian traditional rulers has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

fails WP:LIST - all entries in the list (with 1 exception) do not have articles - notability of the entries is not established

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. Amsaim (talk) 22:20, 27 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Please remember that we can't use regular blogs in biographies. The two exceptions are blogs written by the biography subjects, for assertions about themselves only, and blogs hosted by mainstream news agencies. See WP:BLP and WP:V.   Will Beback  talk  08:17, 30 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I have nominated List of Nigerian traditional rulers, 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/List of Nigerian traditional rulers. 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. Amsaim (talk) 21:37, 31 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I have nominated 2010 Discovery Communications headquarters hostage crisis, 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/2010 Discovery Communications headquarters hostage crisis. 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. —fetch·comms 03:18, 2 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

http://www.afropedea.com
http://www.afropedea.org —Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.186.48.62 (talk) 02:51, 13 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion has begun about whether the article Next constitution of Zimbabwe, which you created or to which you contributed, should be deleted. While contributions are welcome, an article may be deleted if it is inconsistent with Wikipedia policies and guidelines for inclusion, explained in the deletion policy.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Next constitution of Zimbabwe until a consensus is reached, and you are welcome to contribute to the discussion.

You may edit the article during the discussion, including to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion template from the top of the article. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 23:57, 22 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent additions to the article Gamebook relating to addventures, which deepen and improve that article. However, (a) addventures are neither games nor books. While they are definitely related to the topic of "gamebooks" you might give some thought to how to better explain their relevance to article. And (b) as with all content on Wikipedia your addition is required to be referenced; could you please add references supporting your addition, as it is not obviously on its face either notable or factual (though I'm sure you can establish that with a reference). Thanks! - DustFormsWords (talk) 05:38, 11 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Video game engines has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Thank you. Addionne (talk) 15:55, 26 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, nice template! Did you mean to add the 2010 Ecuador crisis? --BelovedFreak 11:22, 18 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Biased editing of Technological Utopianism by Loremaster.

Due to your past contribution to Technological utopianism, you may currently want to help editing the Technological utopianism article because currently only one editor is contributing to the article. The Singularitarianism Article could also benefit from your help.

I feel Loremaster is editing Singularitarianism and Technological utopianism in a biased manner in accordance with his Save The Earth propaganda. Loremasters's ideology seems to verge towards Neo-Luddism. Here are the damming facts Loremaster has stated in discussion:

Loremaster says he is:

"...critical of techno-utopianism in all its forms."

Loremaster wants people to:

"...stop indulging in techno-utopian fantasies... ...so that we can all focus on energies on saving the planet."

Loremaster sees his editing as a 'fight' and he states:

"Although I am convinced that the world is in fact heading toward an ecological catastrophe, I think it can be averted and my optimism makes me want to fight to do do just that."

81.151.135.248 (talk) 12:23, 18 December 2010 (UTC)JB[reply]

1. LOL
2. Despite the fact that I openly admit to being a technorealist who is critical of techno-utopianism in all its forms, I have let never this point of view influence any of my edits or reverts of the Technological utopianism or Singularitarianism articles. On the contrary, I am the person most responsible for expanding the former article with content some would argue is “pro-techno-utopian” (i.e. passages from James Hughes' book Citizen Cyborg).
3. I find it disgusting that 81.151.135.248 would take comments I made out of context to falsely make it seem I see my editing of any article as part of my fight for the environment.
4. In light of this outrageous act of bad faith, I will do everything in my power to get this jerk banned from Wikipedia.

--Loremaster (talk) 00:58, 20 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Mac OS X HTML editors has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Thank you. Fleet Command (talk) 17:25, 31 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Vegetarian and vegan media, which you created, has been nominated for 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. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 23:12, 4 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Ethnicity in Atlanta has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Thank you. Mhiji 00:19, 10 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I notice that you recently created a new page, Features of Twitter. First, thank you for your contribution; Wikipedia relies solely on the efforts of volunteers such as you. Unfortunately, the page you created covers a topic on which we already have a page - Twitter. Because of the duplication, your article has been tagged for speedy deletion. Please note that this is not a comment on you personally and we hope you will to continue helping improve Wikipedia. If the topic of the article you created is one that interests you, then perhaps you would like to help out at Twitter - you might like to discuss new information at the article's talk page.

If you think that the article you created should remain separate, 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. Additionally if you would like to have someone review articles you create before they go live so they are not nominated for deletion shortly after you post them, allow me to suggest the article creation process and using our search feature to find related information we already have in the encyclopedia. Try not to be discouraged. Wikipedia looks forward to your future contributions. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 12:58, 11 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Template:SWAMandateAdmins has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Thank you. Mhiji 21:24, 11 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Template:LagosState-FedRep has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Thank you. — This, that, and the other (talk) 10:48, 12 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Mayors of Rishon LeZion has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Thank you. — This, that, and the other (talk) 06:32, 14 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Template:South African ties has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. — This, that, and the other (talk) 11:04, 26 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Toussaint... I wanted to let you know that I have nominated the article on David Kato to be considered for an appearance on the main page in the Did You Know ...? section. The nomination can be seen at Template talk:Did you know#David Kato. You are most welcome to participate in the discussion of the nomination, should you wish. If the nomination is successful, you will be recognised as one of the authors who contributed significantly to the article. Regards, EdChem (talk) 06:03, 29 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

On 8 February 2011, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article David Kato, which you created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that after Rolling Stone published photos and addresses of 100 gays and lesbians under the headline "Hang Them", Ugandan gay rights activist David Kato was awarded USh1.5 million in damages? You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

—HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 06:05, 8 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

If you want add informations about rights of same-sex couples, you should edit Same-sex marriage in New York article. The second article about exactly the same topic is dispensable. Your article had any sources. Ron 1987 (talk) 01:27, 12 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The reason for the separate article is because same-sex marriage is not performable in the state, and the issue of marriage recognition in the state is a subset of the general topic of recognition of same-sex unions, of which the state allows for one in-borders: unregistered cohabitation. Source: [1]. --Toussaint (talk) 05:28, 12 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

1. Source is about adoption, not about recognition of same-sex unions. 2. All informations about recognition of same-sex unions in concrete jurisdiction should be in one article. If you want, you can change Same-sex marriage in New York article's title to Recognition of same-sex unions in New York. Perhaps this title is more appropriate. Ron 1987 (talk) 22:43, 12 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The latter is actually what I wanted. I'm surprised that it uses its current title. --Toussaint (talk) 00:57, 15 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Template:SACorrectionalMinisters has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. — This, that, and the other (talk) 03:05, 13 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, I'm not sure if you're aware of this, but I've actually been working on and off for months on a list of groups designated as hate groups, and I hope you don't mind my saying that mine is better linked and referenced (I'm only including groups with working bluelinks, while yours has many redlinks and also some bluelinks that go to the wrong things, and everything on mine is cited; mine also includes the Anti-Defamation League's listings, per a weak consensus at talk:splc). Why don't we collaborate? My draft is at User:Roscelese/List of designated hate groups. I'd definitely appreciate your help, especially given that the SPLC list has just been updated again. Roscelese (talk ⋅ contribs) 05:00, 27 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Just looked at it. It looks better organized and has both SPLC and ADL listings. I can work with you on it, but a few points:

• I don't know if Rationale is where we could insert SPLC's "ideology" classifications or not.
• I'm kinda divided on including both listings or separating them.
• Let's clarify in the title that this list pertains to United States-based organizations. I'm sure that publications in other countries (Searchlight in the UK, for example) might also have their own hate group listings since they engage in tracking them. --Toussaint (talk) 11:05, 27 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I wasn't actually sure what to do about Rationale. For some of the groups, there are good quotes about why they were listed, but for some we just have their classification. Should we try to include a rationale for all of them, or just the ones with specific quotes? (The other problem is that ADL does not classify in the same way. For this reason I'm thinking just quotes would be better. Do you mind if I revert until we figure out how to make it work?)

What do you think would be the merits of keeping them in one table vs. separating?

Ooooh, that's a great point about Searchlight. I wonder if they do have a list.

-- Roscelese (talk ⋅ contribs) 15:46, 27 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Alex Jones (radio host) has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. — Arthur Rubin (talk) 10:41, 8 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not add or change content without verifying it by citing reliable sources, as you did to One Mic. Before making any potentially controversial edits, it is recommended that you discuss them first on the article's talk page. Please review the guidelines at Wikipedia:Citing sources and take this opportunity to add references to the article. Thank you. Dan56 (talk) 08:32, 27 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I'm restoring this section because there was no reason for why there was no synopsis in the first place. Furthermore, I cited a credible source from MTV. --Toussaint (talk) 10:15, 27 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not add unsourced content, as you did to One Mic. This contravenes Wikipedia's policy on verifiability. If you continue to do so, you may be blocked from editing Wikipedia. The content in question, the uncited "synopsis" material, must be cited properly, and the burden lies with you to provide a source. Consider this template, and please review Wikipedia's guidelines on citing sources, as it will help you make more constructive edits in the future.

This was not a threat. Wikipedia has policies and guidelines that we must all conform to if we are to make constructive edits, and there is no room for our own "justification". Dan56 (talk) 21:13, 27 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Blogs about the environment and environmentalism, which you created, has been nominated for discussion. 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. -- Alan Liefting (talk) - 01:08, 9 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

If you plan to add more of these, please would you add |Adam or whatever. Who is included? Anyone with the surname? Kittybrewster ☎ 09:29, 4 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, I just wanted to drop a line and say thanks for you recent edits on South African municipal elections, 2011. I am busy tabulating the results for KZN which should be done sometime this afternoon. If you are still committed to what you have said on your userpage I certainly hope that you come to South Africa. We need people like you! :D Much <3, User:DiscipleOfKnowledge (talk) 09:39, 21 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

It would be interesting to come down in the future. Thanks! --Toussaint (talk) 02:48, 23 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

On 25 May 2011, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Rick Welts, which you created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that Phoenix Suns president and CEO Rick Welts became the first prominent American sports executive to come out as gay when he did so in an interview with The New York Times on May 15, 2011? You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

The DYK project (nominate) 08:04, 25 May 2011 (UTC)

Hello. The Wikimedia Foundation has received a complaint from the copyright holder about content you placed on Wikipedia in March 2009. Specifically, material you added to the article Optical computing was substantially copied from [2]. Archives confirm that they published this content prior to its placement on Wikipedia, so there is no chance that it was placed in this article first. Certainly, it does not look good on the project when copyright owners notice their material being unlawfully used.

As this took place over two years ago, it is possible that you are now aware that Wikipedia's policies do not permit importing text from previously published sources unless you are able to verify that this material is public domain or compatibly licensed. However, I see that you were advised of copyright policy in 2007, several years before you pasted this material, so I cannot presume that this is true. Please be sure you are familiar with copyright policy, as we are required to block access to Wikipedia to individuals who repeatedly infringe copyright to remain compliant with US law. When content is marked "All Rights Reserved", as this source is, there really is no question. But if you aren't sure if content is usable, you should seek feedback. --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 15:39, 5 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, this is a different issue. It seems that you actually copied content from one article to another, so were undoubtedly unaware of the copyright problem in the text. I need to go back further to see where it came in to Optical computer. You may, since March 2009, have become aware of procedures for attributing text copied from one article to another, but in case not I'll explain that content on Wikipedia is also not public domain; it's fine to copy it from one article to another, but you must attribute it to the original authors. Besides complying with license requirements, this has the benefit of helping investigations of this sort, as the history of text can be more easily traced. (In this case, the only reason I realized it was not yours was because the content you copied included {{fact}} from December 2010.) You can see more about this at Help:Merge and Help:Split, as well as the more recently created comprehensive Wikipedia:Copy-paste. If you have copied content from other articles in the past - even if it was a long time ago - please repair attribution for license compliance. (I've repaired this one: [3], [4], [5], [6]) --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 15:46, 5 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The article Elie Frizli has been proposed for deletion because 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.

If you created the article, please don't take offense. Instead, consider improving the article. For help on inserting references, see Wikipedia:Referencing for beginners or ask at Wikipedia:Help desk. Once you have provided at least one reliable source, you may remove the {{prod blp}} tag. Please do not remove the tag unless the article is sourced. If you cannot provide such a source within ten days, the article may be deleted, but you can request that it be undeleted when you are ready to add one. Regards, SunCreator ^(talk) 14:20, 10 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. If you can, please consider completing this article with personal biographical details. Thanks. --Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 08:14, 13 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The article Augustine Chihuri has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Completely unsourced BLP since 2008. Fails WP:GNG.

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. Regards, SunCreator ^(talk) 21:00, 24 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

		The LGBT Barnstar
		For your rapid and timely expansion of LGBT in New York articles, enabling a feature in In the news. Quigley (talk) 23:59, 27 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hi.This article is still insufficiently referenced. The only sources are primary, and ones that only contain a fleeting reference that does not cover the subject in depth or support any of the biographical content. If you can, please consider completing this article before it is proposed for deletion. Thanks. --Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 01:49, 28 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

OK, I've cited as much as I can possibly pull up at this time. Information on the woman is scant save for whatever is published in NYT and Salon, but I've already, more than sufficiently, proven that she exists. --Toussaint (talk) 05:59, 28 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hi! Looks like e reasonable edit, great.[7] :) Anyway, could you please finish your job by providing the sources for the second paragraph (The 2000s has also seen... etc.). (Surprise, surprise, the reason why I left it without the footnotes was that the stuff was dealt with in the rest of the article.) Thanks! -- Frous (talk) 16:25, 30 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

In [8] and [9] you added the non-existent Category:Awards juries and committees. Are you planning to create it? Articles should only be in existing categories. PrimeHunter (talk) 21:36, 2 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

In light of the seemingly endless disputes over their respective titles, a neutral mediator has crafted a proposal to rename the two major abortion articles (pro-life/anti-abortion movement, and pro-choice/abortion rights movement) to completely new names. The idea, which is located here, is currently open for opinions. As you have been a contributor in the past to at least one of the articles, your thoughts on the matter would be appreciated.

The hope is that, if a consensus can be reached on the article titles, the energy that has been spent debating the titles of the articles here and here can be better spent giving both articles some much needed improvement to their content. Please take some time to read the proposal and weigh in on the matter. Even if your opinion is simple indifference, that opinion would be valuable to have posted.

To avoid accusations that this posting violates WP:CANVASS, this posting is being made to every non-anon editor who has edited either page since 1 July 2010, irrespective of possible previous participation at the mediation page. HuskyHuskie (talk) 20:06, 4 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article FFmpeg hosting service 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/FFmpeg hosting service 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. Marokwitz (talk) 10:54, 10 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I expanded refs on User:Toussaint/Carrier Instant Messenger without thinking to ask first - hope that's cool. --Lexein (talk) 04:01, 18 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

This is an automated message from CorenSearchBot. I have performed a web search with the contents of Independent city (United States), and it appears to include material copied directly from http://gnosis.cx/download/pywikipedia/cache/Independent%20city.

It is possible that the bot is confused and found similarity where none actually exists. If that is the case, you can remove the tag from the article. The article will be reviewed to determine if there are any copyright issues.

If substantial content is duplicated and it is not public domain or available under a compatible license, it will be deleted. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material. You may use such publications as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. See our copyright policy for further details. (If you own the copyright to the previously published content and wish to donate it, see Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials for the procedure.) CorenSearchBot (talk) 07:47, 18 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

A tag has been placed on Mobile wiki 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 web content, 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 see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, contest the deletion by clicking on the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion," which appears inside of the speedy deletion ({{db-...}}) tag (if no such tag exists, the page is no longer a speedy delete candidate). Doing so will take you to the talk page where you will find a pre-formatted place for you to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. You can also visit the the page's talk page directly to give your reasons, 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. Albacore (talk) 20:12, 20 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

An article that you have been involved in editing, YouTube , has been proposed for a merge with another article. If you are interested in the merge discussion, please participate by going here, and adding your comments on the discussion page. Thank you. JC Rules! (talk) 03:41, 17 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The article Features of YouTube has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

This is a duplicate page of YouTube. Most information on this page is mentioned in the article, YouTube. If this page only focuses on different features of YouTube within seven days, this page may not be deleted. Consider removing the sections and contents of Video Technology, Content accessibility, and Localization.

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. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. JC Rules! (talk) 04:28, 18 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hi! Just wondered what made you "undo" my edit on this article last night. My edit was to clarify that these events could hardly have taken place during the 21st of August, as reports of them were put there some eight minutes past midnight, Libyan time (i e _not_ Qatari/Al Jazeera time ;-) )! My wording edit was also to get closer to what the sources said and avoid a feeling that someone put these lines there as pure "propaganda" (it seemed somewhat fishy). Many thanks in advance for clarification.--Paracel63 (talk) 12:28, 21 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Toussaint,

I am writing a research paper on the history of Libyan political personnel and came across a wiki article you contributed to, which I translated from Arabic to English using google. The article is entitled “General People’s Committee” and can be accessed as follows: http://ar.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/اللجنة_الشعبية_العامة This article is exactly what I’m looking for, but there is a historical hole from 1990 – 2006. Do you have any idea why these dates are missing from the article? Do you have any information on this topic pertaining to 1990 – 2006 or know of any other sources I can consult to find the missing information? I have to submit my paper to my professor by Monday morning, so if you could prove any help at all, I would truly appreciate it! Please feel free to contact me directly via e-mail at [email protected].

Thank you in advance for your time and hope to hear from you soon!

Sincerely, Ann Green — Preceding unsigned comment added by AGreen789 (talk • contribs) 19:57, 29 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Fictional characters on the autistic spectrum, which you created, has been nominated for discussion. 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. Chris Cunningham (user:thumperward) - talk 14:30, 12 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

New page patrol – Survey Invitation Hello Toussaint! The WMF is currently developing new tools to make new page patrolling much easier. Whether you  have patrolled many pages or only a few, we now need to  know about your experience. The survey takes only 6 minutes, and the information you provide will not be shared with third parties other than to assist us in analyzing the results of the survey; the WMF will not use the information to identify you. If this invitation  also appears on other accounts you  may  have, please complete the  survey  once only.  If this has been sent to you in error and you have never patrolled new pages, please ignore it. Please click HERE to take part. Many thanks in advance for providing this essential feedback. You are receiving this invitation because you  have patrolled new pages. For more information, please see NPP Survey. Global message delivery 13:41, 26 October 2011 (UTC)

A tag has been placed on Template:South Africa topic requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section T3 of the criteria for speedy deletion because it is a deprecated or orphaned template. After seven days, if it is still unused and the speedy deletion tag has not been removed, the template will be deleted.

If the template is intended to be substituted, please feel free to remove the speedy deletion tag and please consider putting a note on the template's page indicating that it must be substituted so as to avoid any future mistakes (<noinclude>{{substituted}}</noinclude>).

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, contest the deletion by clicking on the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion". Doing so will take you to the talk page where you will find a pre-formatted place for you to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. You can also visit the page's talk page directly to give your reasons, 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. Bulwersator (talk) 15:54, 9 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

A tag has been placed on Ahmed Rifaat (judge) 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 person or group of people, 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 see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, contest the deletion by clicking on the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion". Doing so will take you to the talk page where you will find a pre-formatted place for you to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. You can also visit the page's talk page directly to give your reasons, 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. Mattg82 (talk) 02:55, 11 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The article Ahmed Rifaat (judge) has been proposed for deletion because, under Wikipedia policy, all newly created biographies of living persons must have at least one reference to a reliable source that directly supports material in the article.

If you created the article, please don't be offended. Instead, consider improving the article. For help on inserting references, see Referencing for beginners, or ask at the help desk. Once you have provided at least one reliable source, you may remove the {{prod blp}} tag. Please do not remove the tag unless the article is sourced. If you cannot provide such a source within ten days, the article may be deleted, but you can request that it be undeleted when you are ready to add one. Mattg82 (talk) 14:34, 11 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Vegetarian and vegan media, which you created, has been nominated for discussion. 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. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 08:57, 22 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Please see the discussion at Talk:Straight_pride#Proposed_merge. Thanks. Viriditas (talk) 04:13, 9 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Spider-Man (1994 TV series) has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Cerebellum (talk) 01:31, 10 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Straight pride 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/Straight pride (3rd nomination) 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. Worm^TT · (talk) 18:07, 2 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The article Haitian Creole Wikipedia has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Non-notable website, per WP:NOTABLE, composed of first-hand sources.

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. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 22:47, 26 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The article Quechua Wikipedia has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Non-notable website, per WP:NOTABLE, composed of first-hand sources.

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. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 22:57, 26 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Quechua Wikipedia 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/Quechua Wikipedia (3rd nomination) 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 template from the top of the article. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 22:58, 26 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The article Non-conversionary religion has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Non-notable usage

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. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Editor2020 (talk) 02:25, 21 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The article Unity Fellowship Church Movement has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

No evidence of satisfying the notability guidelines. No sources are cited, and looking at the first 30 Google hits I found not a single independent reliable source.

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. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. JamesBWatson (talk) 15:58, 6 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article List of AT&T U-verse channels 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/List of AT&T U-verse channels 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 template from the top of the article. MASEM (t) 13:40, 25 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

FYI, I thought you'd want to know:

• Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of AT&T U-verse channels

I invite you to give your two cents, whether positive, negative or something in between. You've put a lot of work into this article in the past. --A. B. ^{(talk • contribs)} 16:32, 25 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Ooops, I didn't see the note just above mine. Well, consider yourself doubly invited.

--A. B. ^{(talk • contribs)} 16:36, 25 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Big Easy Metropolitan Community Church 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/Big Easy Metropolitan Community Church 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 template from the top of the article.  Ryan Vesey 02:11, 28 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

You have been mentioned at Wikipedia:Missing Wikipedians Ottawahitech (talk) 01:00, 14 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Lili Francks 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/Lili Francks 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 template from the top of the article. Clarityfiend (talk) 01:51, 3 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The reference to the American Community Survey 2000 —- which has been part of LGBT demographics of the United States since you created that article last year — is broken because the Census website has changed. I tried to figure out how to reproduce the original query but wasn't able. If you were the original editor to add this reference, do you think you might take a stab at it? Ibadibam (talk) 23:52, 24 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

A tag has been placed on Ebrahim Moosa requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G12 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article or image appears to be a clear copyright infringement. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material, and as a consequence, your addition will most likely be deleted. You may use external websites as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. This part is crucial: say it in your own words. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing.

If the external website or image belongs to you, and you want to allow Wikipedia to use the text or image — which means allowing other people to modify it — then you must verify that externally by one of the processes explained at Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials. If you are not the owner of the external website or image but have permission from that owner, see Wikipedia:Requesting copyright permission. You might want to look at Wikipedia's policies and guidelines for more details, or ask a question here.

If you think that the page was nominated in error, contest the nomination by clicking on the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion" in the speedy deletion tag. Doing so will take you to the talk page where you can explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. You can also visit the page's talk page directly to give your reasons, but 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 yourself, but do not hesitate to add information that is consistent with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Whpq (talk) 12:13, 3 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Members of the Cape Town City Council 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/Members of the Cape Town City Council 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 template from the top of the article. Peridon (talk) 13:31, 11 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The article Content syndication markup language has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Unsourced, no indication that "content syndication markup language" is a term of any great note in that specific form. As this article has neither content nor sources, it is only justified if we have to cover this specific term. Otherwise the existing articles under "web syndication" are perfectly adequate.

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. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Andy Dingley (talk) 20:27, 17 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

World Digital Library Wikipedia Partnership - We need you!

Hi! I'm the Wikipedian In Residence at the World Digital Library, a project of the Library of Congress and UNESCO. I'm recruiting Wikipedians who are passionate about history & culture to participate in improving Wikipedia using the WDL's vast free online resources. Participants can earn our awesome WDL barnstar and help to disseminate free knowledge from over 100 libraries in 7 different languages. Please sign up to participate here. Thanks for editing Wikipedia and I look forward to working with you! SarahStierch (talk) 19:36, 22 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Saiyuki has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Gabriel Yuji (talk) 00:46, 12 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading or contributing to File:Tkhtml.PNG. I notice the file page specifies that the file is being used under non-free content criteria, but there is not a suitable explanation or rationale as to why each specific use in Wikipedia is acceptable. Please go to the file description page, and edit it to include a non-free rationale.

If you have uploaded other non-free media, consider checking that you have specified the non-free rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'file' 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 "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the file is already gone, you can still make a request for undeletion and ask for a chance to fix the problem. If you have any questions, please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 16:52, 5 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Appeal to psychology 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/Appeal to psychology 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. Insulam Simia (^talk/_contribs) 20:33, 15 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

A tag has been placed on Template:Spanish Creoles requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section T3 of the criteria for speedy deletion because it is a deprecated or orphaned template. After seven days, if it is still unused and the speedy deletion tag has not been removed, the template will be deleted.

If the template is intended to be substituted, please feel free to remove the speedy deletion tag and please consider putting a note on the template's page indicating that it must be substituted so as to avoid any future mistakes (<noinclude>{{substituted}}</noinclude>).

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page's talk page, where you can 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, you can place a request here. Lfdder (talk) 13:04, 5 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Afro-Asiatic-speaking nations has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Lfdder (talk) 14:51, 19 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]