User talk:Litherlandsand

My alternate accounts:

• User:Placename Hlio - for Medieval and Roman stuff.

Welcome

Welcome!

Hello, Litherlandsand, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

• The five pillars of Wikipedia
• Tutorial
• How to edit a page
• How to write a great article
• Manual of Style

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your messages on discussion pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question on this page and then place {{helpme}} before the question. Again, welcome! — Ched (talk) 11:04, 16 February 2009 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Bracelet, Lancashire

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

Unable to prove the hamlet exists. The AA, multimap.co.uk, Wikimapia and Google Maps don't have any trace of it. The only reference I can find that it may exist is http://books.google.co.uk/books?id=GxENAAAAYAAJ&pg=PA19&lpg=PA19&dq=bracelet+lancashire+hamlet&source=web&ots=2JC_Cy3guC&sig=yecYObKd2NnI_cELDjn22Cxr7Gk&hl=en&ei=yvSbSf7GH9zFjAf-49m9BQ&sa=X&oi=book_result&resnum=1&ct=result. If it's to be kept, it really needs some location information and/or map coordinates

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. CultureDrone (talk) 11:55, 18 February 2009 (UTC)

Stand, Greater Manchester

Thanks. I added the above to the disambiguation list for Stand. You may want to have a look at Prestwich-cum-Oldham. Many of the sources I've used in the Radcliffe article will be relevant to Stand, as will much of the information in the Whitefield, Greater Manchester article. Parrot of Doom (talk) 17:32, 18 February 2009 (UTC)

{{Toponymy-stub}}

Greetings! I see you have recently created one or more new stub templates or categories. As it states at Wikipedia:Stub, at the top of most stub categories, and in many other places on Wikipedia, it is recommended that new stub types be proposed prior to creation at Wikipedia:WikiProject Stub sorting/Proposals. This helps to reach consensus about whether the new stub type is already covered by existing stub types, whether it is named according to stub naming guidelines, whether it is otherwise correctly formatted, whether it reaches the standard threshold for creation of a new stub type, and whether it crosses existing stub type hierarchies. Your new stub type is currently listed at Wikipedia:WikiProject Stub sorting/Discoveries, where comments are welcome as to any rationale for this stub type. Please, in future, consider proposing new stub types first at Wikipedia:WikiProject Stub sorting/Proposals! Grutness...wha? 23:30, 18 February 2009 (UTC)

NSW articles

Hey, Litherlandsand (i'm not sure if i should be replying here or back on my talk page), yes i would be interested in helping out with editing NSW articles. I can't promise to be regular, but just drop me a line with any suggestions & i will certainly have a look. ciao David Woodward (talk) 02:22, 19 February 2009 (UTC)

Speedy deletion of Jutta Dierks

A tag has been placed on Jutta Dierks 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, as well as our subject-specific notability guideline for biographies.

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), 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 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. Jenuk1985 | Talk 08:05, 19 February 2009 (UTC)

Speedy deletion of Doraly Rosa

A tag has been placed on Doraly Rosa 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, as well as our subject-specific notability guideline for biographies.

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), 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 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. Jenuk1985 | Talk 08:07, 19 February 2009 (UTC)

Re: Warning

No worries. Since Alexandra Burke is a living person we need to be extremely careful what we write about her, and anything - particularly anything controversial - should be cited so that other readers can verify it. Cheers, and apologies for labelling you a vandal! This flag once was red^propaganda_deeds 12:00, 23 February 2009 (UTC)

This user is asking that their block be reviewed:

Litherlandsand (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

---

Request reason:

I am not Sunholm, nor have I even heard of the user. I am a legitimate user from another wiki that is nonwikimedia. I do not know why I have been accused of being a sockpuppet, and I am genuinely disappointed I have been treated this way. I only came here to make helpful edits and was not treated properly by the admin.
I am not editing on behalf of anyone else, only editing myself. I am only here to help, and have no malicious intentions, no vandalism intentions, only positive things.

Notes:

• In some cases, you may not in fact be blocked, or your block has already expired. Please check the list of active blocks. If no block is listed, then you have been autoblocked by the automated anti-vandalism systems. Please remove this request and follow these instructions instead for quick attention by an administrator.
• Please read our guide to appealing blocks to make sure that your unblock request will help your case. You may change your request at any time.

Administrator use only:

If you ask the blocking administrator to comment on this request, replace this template with the following, replacing "blocking administrator" with the name of the blocking admin:

{{Unblock on hold |1=blocking administrator |2=I am not Sunholm, nor have I even heard of the user. I am a legitimate user from another wiki that is nonwikimedia. I do not know why I have been accused of being a sockpuppet, and I am genuinely disappointed I have been treated this way. I only came here to make helpful edits and was not treated properly by the admin.<br />I am not editing on behalf of anyone else, only editing myself. I am only here to help, and have no malicious intentions, no vandalism intentions, only positive things. |3 = ~~~~}}

If you decline the unblock request, replace this template with the following code, substituting {{subst:Decline reason here}} with a specific rationale. Leaving the decline reason unchanged will result in display of a default reason, explaining why the request was declined.

{{unblock reviewed |1=I am not Sunholm, nor have I even heard of the user. I am a legitimate user from another wiki that is nonwikimedia. I do not know why I have been accused of being a sockpuppet, and I am genuinely disappointed I have been treated this way. I only came here to make helpful edits and was not treated properly by the admin.<br />I am not editing on behalf of anyone else, only editing myself. I am only here to help, and have no malicious intentions, no vandalism intentions, only positive things. |decline = {{subst:Decline reason here}} ~~~~}}

If you accept the unblock request, replace this template with the following, substituting Accept reason here with your rationale:

{{unblock reviewed |1=I am not Sunholm, nor have I even heard of the user. I am a legitimate user from another wiki that is nonwikimedia. I do not know why I have been accused of being a sockpuppet, and I am genuinely disappointed I have been treated this way. I only came here to make helpful edits and was not treated properly by the admin.<br />I am not editing on behalf of anyone else, only editing myself. I am only here to help, and have no malicious intentions, no vandalism intentions, only positive things. |accept = accept reason here ~~~~}}