User talk:Mayalld
| This is a Wikipedia user talk page. This is not an encyclopedia article or the talk page for an encyclopedia article. If you find this page on any site other than Wikipedia, you are viewing a mirror site. Be aware that the page may be outdated and that the user whom this page is about may have no personal affiliation with any site other than Wikipedia. The original talk page is located at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Mayalld. |
Author blanked the page, causing a non-admin closure due to speedy deletion {{G7}}. Cheers! - CobaltBlueTony™ talk 14:23, 2 July 2008 (UTC)
Speedy Deletion of Dylan's Couch
Please do not delete the Dylan's Couch article. I posted reasons on its talk page.
-Keith☺ 15:48, 2 July 2008 (UTC)
Speedy Deletion of Ergohuman
Can you give me a reason why its tagged for deletion? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Niceday2008 (talk • contribs) 12:08, 3 July 2008 (UTC)
- Certainly. The article is not encylopedic, and serves no purpose other than to sell chairs. Mayalld (talk) 12:12, 3 July 2008 (UTC)
The Aeron page does nothing but promote it. Look all im doing is adding content, which bits do you want me to remove. I have a few chairs i want to add (such as the enjoy, the brant, the nefil, the liberty, freedom, contessa and mirra). —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.149.119.7 (talk) 14:28, 3 July 2008 (UTC)
Please reply to me as i dont think that this is at all fair. How on earth is it advertising? am i saying "buy now at $xx.xx"? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Niceday2008 (talk • contribs) 14:34, 3 July 2008 (UTC)
- I'm not considering other articles, I'm looking at this one. The fact that other poor articles exist isn't a reason for yet another. Wikipedia reflects notability, it doesn't confer it, and this article doesn't demonstrate any notability. It is also seriously unbalanced. It isn't an impartial account of the chair, it is a puff piece, talking it up. Mayalld (talk) 14:46, 3 July 2008 (UTC)
Barbara Allen (singer)
I'm sorry, my friend! I did not mean to attack you in person. I'm sure you are a very friendly and gentle individual. I meant to attack the notability tagging which I thought was unfair. I still think that the article met the notability guidelines.
- The sources did address the subject directly in detail and no original research was needed to extract the content.
- The sources was reliable since I appended two references from at least one online encyclopedia.
Anyhow it doesn't matter anymore. Once more, I'm sorry you were offended, I didn't mean any harm! --Popiloll (talk) 09:16, 4 July 2008 (UTC)
- Not a problem.
- Notability tagging means that I am not satisfied that article has proved by means of the references provided that the subject is notable. It makes no value judgement as to whether the subject is, or is not notable. It just says there is more work to be done here. In cases where I am convinced that the subject is not notable, I would immediately tag for deletion.
- As things stand now,the article has been deleted, not on the grounds of notability, but because you, as the only substantial author, blanked it. If you believe that notability can be established, then we can ask the deleting admin to restore it. Mayalld (talk) 09:59, 4 July 2008 (UTC)
Signpost updated for June 30, 2008.
 |
|---|
|
| ||
| Volume 4, Issue 27 | 30 June 2008 | About the Signpost |
|
| ||
|
| |
| Home | Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | Shortcut : WP:POST |
|
| |
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot (talk) 03:41, 4 July 2008 (UTC)
two AfD nominations for List of defunct Pennsylvania sports teams
I'm curious why you felt the need to nominate the article twice. Stepheng3 (talk) 14:48, 4 July 2008 (UTC)
- I suffered a connection glitch, and it looked like it hadn't completed Mayalld (talk) 15:07, 4 July 2008 (UTC)
The University of Newcastle Chamber Choir
Page is quite different now. Would like to know your comment--Jackevans83 (talk) 11:17, 7 July 2008 (UTC)
Please read articles before deleting
I posted a new article. It had five links to daily newspapers. HYou obviously deleted it without even looking at it.Elan26 (talk) 12:58, 7 July 2008 (UTC)Elan26
or, you could just take down the PROD. the error, as I have written, was that I typed reference where I ought to have typed reflist. So the references did not appear. Therefore , you auto-deleted it. Simple mistake, easy to correct without making a lot of other people spend time reading the article.Elan26 (talk) 14:03, 7 July 2008 (UTC)Elan26
I don't know what a bot is, authorized or un-. What I do know is taht I posted a simple article about a ntoable blog, I posted the footnotes wrong, and it got a delete message pasted on it instantly. If you had read it, you would have seen that there were many footnotes and, perhaps, corrected my mistyping that made the many footnotes fail to appear under References. I assume that your posting of this delete tag was in some way automatic, becaue nobody can read that fast. I was not using automatic as a term of art, merely as an assumption by a non-technical person that things that hapen instantly are done by automotons of some sort not by persons.Elan26 (talk) 14:28, 7 July 2008 (UTC)Elan
Stop being a bully
I wrote you a note. I admit that I was annoyed to see a DELETE tag posted atop an article the instant I posted it. Okay. You didn't DELETE it you proposed it for instant deletion. I speak English, not Wikiese. So I wrote delete, not , well whatever the Wiki-speak work is, because the notice that appeared instantly read Delete. Then I wrote you a note asking you to take down the PROD. There, I'm learning to speak Wiki. Now you are threatening me with blocking? Are you serious? Is this the way Wikipedia works?Elan26 (talk) 14:42, 7 July 2008 (UTC)Elan26
Perhaps
You could simply merge the little article I wrote into the Education Week page instead of writing angry messages on my talk page.Elan26 (talk) 15:23, 7 July 2008 (UTC)Elan26
- That is a matter for the Wikipedia Community over the next 5 days. I note, however that you are continuing to make accusations about my behaviour on the AfD page. Please accept that you broke the rules by making unfounded allegations. You have two ways forward from here;
- Continue to make a fuss about it, and accuse me of bullying on account of my having legitimately warned you that your personal attacks were not allowed, and risk a block.
- Move on. Leave the AfD to run its course, cut it out with the accusations and assumptions of bad faith, and delete the warnings from your talk page, and nobody will care about it by next week.
- Your choice to make. Mayalld (talk) 15:32, 7 July 2008 (UTC)
Livemercial
Hi. Just wondering if it may not be best to keep the "gentleman"'s comments on the AfD so the record is maintained of their actions for future people in case the whole thing pops up again. Jasynnash2 (talk) 15:29, 7 July 2008 (UTC)
- Done! If my restoration, and comment are wide of the mark, please feel free to amend Mayalld (talk) 15:37, 7 July 2008 (UTC)
- Looks fine to me and thanks Jasynnash2 (talk) 15:40, 7 July 2008 (UTC)
Speedy Deletion of New Deal Cafe
I respectfully suggest waiting than 2 minutes after a page has been created before proposing a Speedy Delete, especially when that page already includes an independent newspaper citation.
Wikipedia:CSD states "Contributors sometimes create articles over several edits, so try to avoid deleting a page too soon after its creation if it appears incomplete. Users nominating a page for speedy deletion should specify which criteria the page meets and, when appropriate, notify the page's creator." Spril4 (talk) 17:31, 7 July 2008 (UTC)