|
||||||||||||||||
This page has archives. Sections older than 7 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III when more than 5 sections are present. |
Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Zoroastrian Students' Association
This was an improper non-admin closure of an AFD discussion. There were only two opinions given: mine as nominator, and one other keep opinion based on the fact that "it's an old organization; there must be sources" but without any evidence that there were any sources. Given the split nature of the discussion, a relist was in order. WikiDan61ChatMe!ReadMe!! 11:07, 16 June 2016 (UTC)
- Thank you for your contribution at WP:AFD. As an uninvolved administrator, I have reopened your closure of Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Zoroastrian Students' Association as in my view, there is insufficient discussion with which to decide on the consensus. I have relisted the page to generate a more thorough discussion. Do not be disheartened by this, take it as being a sign that the decision was not as obvious as you thought. --Malcolmxl5 (talk) 13:11, 16 June 2016 (UTC)
- Hello WikiDan61 and Malcolmxl5, thanks for your messages. I noticed that the AfD has been reopened and hence I am not making any further edits on the article / related pages. Let me know if you need something from me as well. Cheers, Arun Kumar SINGH (Talk) 15:44, 16 June 2016 (UTC)
- Hello WikiDan61 & Malcolmxl5, can you give this AfD a look please? The discussion is still at the same place since it was re-opened and has fallen in Old AfD list again. Do we want to keep this open for any longer? Thanks, Arun Kumar SINGH (Talk) 02:12, 24 June 2016 (UTC)
Disambiguation link notification for June 24
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
- St. Theresa’s Boys High School (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
- added a link pointing to Church
- Sunil Kumar Choudhary (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
- added a link pointing to Posthumous
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:58, 24 June 2016 (UTC)
- Comment. Fixed. Arun Kumar SINGH (Talk) 10:03, 24 June 2016 (UTC)
DYK nomination of RLV-TD
Hello! Your submission of RLV-TD at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know!
Please note that the nomination is on the verge of closing as unsuccessful. If you can address the issues raised both in the review and on the article's talk page, this is your final opportunity to do so. Best of luck. BlueMoonset (talk) 16:46, 24 June 2016 (UTC)
You've got mail!
Message added 02:21, 25 June 2016 (UTC). It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.
Omni Flames (talk) 02:21, 25 June 2016 (UTC)
- Hello Omni Flames, checked my inbox and no emails received. Can you please re-transmit the email on arunsingh16@gmail.com? Thanks, Arun Kumar SINGH (Talk) 06:05, 25 June 2016 (UTC)
- Done Not sure what happened there. Omni Flames (talk) 06:07, 25 June 2016 (UTC)
This is an improper closure under WP:NAC. experienced non-admins in good standing may consider closing a discussion on that page which is beyond doubt a clear keep. LibStar (talk) 12:08, 25 June 2016 (UTC)
- this is now at deletion review. LibStar (talk) 12:13, 25 June 2016 (UTC)
- Given that this is not your first (or second, or even third) instance of an improper non-admin closure, perhaps you should consider refraining from this activity in the future. There is no rush to close AFDs, and except under extraordinary circumstances, they should only be closed by experienced admins. NAC should not be used as a means of just helping clean up the backlog unless the case is crystal clear. If there is any doubt whatsoever, NAC should not be used. A no-consensus closure is never a case of "no doubt whatsoever" and NAC should never be used for that. (As a contrast, the only time I ever use NAC is if the article under discussion has already been speedily deleted, and the deleting admin simply neglected to close the AFD themselves.) WikiDan61ChatMe!ReadMe!! 12:33, 25 June 2016 (UTC)
- this is now at deletion review. LibStar (talk) 12:13, 25 June 2016 (UTC)
- LibStar, explain to me why is that an improper closure? Just because you happen to be the nominator and you argued with everyone who voted keep? As far as your understanding of non-admins performing closures, read this. It clearly states that non-admins can perform AfD closure as "Keep, Redirect, Merge and no consensus". And dont post threats on my TalkPage about reporting me.
- WikiDan61, yes there has been discussion on my non-admin closure (including a DRV) BUT the final outcome has been exactly the same as my initial action in all the cases. Be sure of what you are accusing me of. If you have an issue and want more discussion on the AfD, then request so and as courtesy to another experienced fellow editor I will re-open it with proper remarks (as I did in case of "Activity centre" and it came out with the same result). As far as no-consensus is concerned, I am sorry but I don't agree with your statement completely. Please read the link I posted above. Thanks for your time folks. Cheers, Arun Kumar SINGH (Talk) 13:21, 25 June 2016 (UTC)
List of Australian middleweight boxing champions AfD closure
I believe you're closing this discussion was not within the limits of Wikipedia:Non-admin closure. This did not look like a clear consensus had been reached or that it was not contentious. I believe it should have been left for an admin. I am going to list this at deletion review. Papaursa (talk) 22:18, 25 June 2016 (UTC)
- Certainly not. This was a clear keep. If the AfD closure does not gel well with what you have been debating in the AfD then its your bad luck. Arun Kumar SINGH (Talk) 02:19, 26 June 2016 (UTC)
Your AfD closes
As I mentioned at Wikipedia:Deletion review/Log/2016 June 25, we need more people doing good work closing AfDs. This stuff about WP:NAC is silly, so lets eliminate that problem. Would you mind if I nominated you for adminship? -- RoySmith (talk) 13:09, 26 June 2016 (UTC)
- Hello RoySmith, thanks for your support and understanding. Well, I was working on WP:OLD with intention to reduce burden on admins. As far as adminship is concerned, I am not sure if I qualify for it yet, simply because I away from Wikipedia for 5 months and got back in May 2016. Cheers, Arun Kumar SINGH (Talk) 09:52, 27 June 2016 (UTC)
A cup of coffee for you!
Thank you for reviewing Edamalakkudi page
Prof TPMS (talk) 12:37, 28 June 2016 (UTC) |
Veerath Bharathi
Why tagged for a deletion of Ms. Bharathi Veerath? May i know the reason please? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sunitharanijohn (talk • contribs) 12:52, 28 June 2016 (UTC)
- Sunitharanijohn, person is not notable and fails WP:GNG. Arun Kumar SINGH (Talk) 12:54, 28 June 2016 (UTC)
Hello!
Dear User AKS.9955,
I have created this article by order of Sebastian Prantl. I got permission to the text and to all pictures. If you would like to talk with him, please send him an e-mail: office@tanzatelierwien.at.
He will confirm my state.
Please do not delete this article, because Mr. Prantl, would like to have his own entry at wikipedia.
Regards — Preceding unsigned comment added by Chin-Tseng (talk • contribs) 14:32, 28 June 2016 (UTC)
- Hello Chin-Tseng, thaks for your contributions to Wikipedia. There are specific guideline for creating articles on Wikipedia that needs to be followed. I will post them on your TalkPage. Please follow them. Cheers, Arun Kumar SINGH (Talk) 14:37, 28 June 2016 (UTC)
CSD nomination
hello Aks.9955 I dont understand why you are having issues with the article i have written. There are many articles of similar nature which are there on wikipedia, but you seem to have chosen the one i have written. I request you to kindly go through this link https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Delacon which is of similar nature. If you wish to add content to the article i understand but simply deleting it when other similar articles exist is not a valid argument. I hope you will take this into account. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dudegols2891 (talk • contribs) 10:35, 29 June 2016 (UTC)
- Hello Dudegols2891, the company you quoted is notable. As per the article, "Delacon pioneered the development of phytogenic feed additives in the 1980s and is the world's largest producer and distributor of these products".
I am not sure what the claims were in the article you wrote, but when I read it,There is nothing notable in the article you created. Arun Kumar SINGH (Talk) 11:09, 29 June 2016 (UTC)
- Hello Dudegols2891, the company you quoted is notable. As per the article, "Delacon pioneered the development of phytogenic feed additives in the 1980s and is the world's largest producer and distributor of these products".
This article should not be speedily deleted for lack of asserted importance because... (your reason here) --TAcMP02112004 (talk) 11:34, 29 June 2016 (UTC) This artcle is real. It is about an 11 year old who has established his own company, Faraz Softwares for designing websites for the sake of a better future. Don't you think that this achievement of Ahmad Faraz should be appreciated and known to the world? So, please dont delete this page as it is a very good and inspiring articles for the children of young ages to take interests in the IT sector. — Preceding unsigned comment added by TAcMP02112004 (talk • contribs)
Result of Drowtales AFD
Hello, AKS.9955. I'm a bit confused why the Drowtales nomination was closed as keep, seeing as the !votes were 2 against 2 and the arguments by those voting "keep" didn't seem productive whatsoever. Could you give some extra explanation? I would particularly like to know how to go forward with the article, as there's just nothing to work with :( ~Mable (chat) 20:57, 29 June 2016 (UTC)
- Hello Mable, AfD outcome is not determined purely by counting votes but the discussion and facts are also considered. Looking at the discussion, the outcome was a clear keep. Cheers, Arun Kumar SINGH (Talk) 05:13, 30 June 2016 (UTC)
- I'm sorry, I really don't want to push this, I just fail to understand how some published books constitute notability. I want to improve articles in the webcomics scope, but I just can't write anything about something like this because there's nothing to work with > ~ < I didn't mean to imply that the exact !votes tally was important; I simply have difficulty understanding the "keep" arguments. There are no sources... ~Mable (chat) 08:30, 30 June 2016 (UTC)
Hey, AKS.9955. I just saw that this AfD Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Sweat Cosmetics was closed. I was about to vote delete as I had a closer look at the sources and found that sources do not show sufficient notability. Nobody had analysed or presented any sources in the AfD. If you don't mind, could this be relisted? --Lemongirl942 (talk) 06:00, 30 June 2016 (UTC)
- Hello Lemongirl942, sorry but no point opening the AfD as it was a clear keep and your vote would still not change the consensus. The AfD was open for over a week and everyone voted for keep. Arun Kumar SINGH (Talk) 06:07, 30 June 2016 (UTC)
- The problem is no one analysed or presented any sources. The !votes were bordering on assertions like "I agree that the article passes GNG.", "Disagree. It's a notable business started by notable women athletes. Article meets WP:GNG criteria." I believe this didn't get enough time to have a clear discussion. If you notice, User:Rebbing left a note asking for a clarification, but it was not clarified either. --Lemongirl942 (talk) 06:11, 30 June 2016 (UTC)
- I am curious to know how this was a "clear keep". 2 !votes were WP:VAGUEWAVE. The discussion had very few participants, a concern stated was not replied and it was not even relisted even once. In my opinion this closure is inappropriate; it was ripe for a WP:RELIST. Pinging Rebbing for their opinion. --Lemongirl942 (talk) 07:16, 30 June 2016 (UTC)
- Hello Lemongirl942, The AfD was open for over a week and you did not vote. You said you were about to vote; but you did not vote. What were you waiting for? I dont see how will the outcome of the AfD change just because of your vote. I am sorry but I wont reopen the AfD. If you still have issues, I recommend you consider DRV. Arun Kumar SINGH (Talk) 08:45, 30 June 2016 (UTC)
- This was possibly closed 15-20 minutes before I was about to vote. I still feel the closure was premature. In any case, I will pursue deletion review. --Lemongirl942 (talk) 08:53, 30 June 2016 (UTC)