This is an archive of past discussions with User:ZooBlazer, for the period 2010. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

The article Kyle Prater has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Non-notable person who fails WP:ATHLETE. Has yet to compete at college level, let alone professional level.

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. Scjessey (talk) 22:16, 10 January 2010 (UTC)

The article Perry Jones has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Non-notable person who fails WP:ATHLETE. Has yet to compete at college level, let alone professional level.

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. Scjessey (talk) 22:18, 10 January 2010 (UTC)

In order for these athletes to warrant having Wikipedia articles, they must be notable. In the case of athletes, they must have competed at the professional level (or the highest amateur levels, like the Olympic Games). This pair of athletes simply don't qualify, and probably won't until they play professionally. -- Scjessey (talk) 22:21, 10 January 2010 (UTC)

No, it does not count. Either they must have had significant news coverage in reliable, secondary sources or they must've competed at the professional level. Do NOT recreate articles that have previously been deleted under the AfD process, as this is seen as vandalism. -- Scjessey (talk) 22:49, 10 January 2010 (UTC)

ESPN and recruitment-related coverage is NOT "significant coverage in reliable sources". Respect Wikipedia policies and make your case in the AfD discussions. Please don't bother me personally with this again. -- Scjessey (talk) 22:55, 10 January 2010 (UTC)

I have nominated Perry Jones, 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/Perry Jones. 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. Scjessey (talk) 22:35, 10 January 2010 (UTC)

I have nominated Kyle Prater, 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/Kyle Prater. 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. Scjessey (talk) 22:36, 10 January 2010 (UTC)

Hi Ice. The articles you're creating may not meet the specific athlete notability guidelines (as non professionals), but they seem to me to meet the general notability guidelines. I'm looking into it a bit and have asked for a wider review and reconsideration of the Prater article. Regardless, nothing is deleted forever, so it may be possible to restore them sooner or later, depending on when a consensus can be established in favor of notability. Take care. Please let me know if I can be of any help. A lot of my articles get nominated for deletion too! :) ChildofMidnight (talk) 02:23, 11 January 2010 (UTC)

Re your message: As others have mentioned to you, the problem is that they currently don't meet the notability guidelines for athletes. If you could find additional articles about them, that would help establish their notability. You should state your case on the relevant AfD, but I recommend that you stay away from the argument that other articles exist as that is not a valid reason not to delete things (see WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS). -- Gogo Dodo (talk) 07:06, 11 January 2010 (UTC)

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Nba live 09 screen.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Mosmof (talk) 20:08, 5 July 2010 (UTC)

Your recent edit to the page Ashley Greene appears to have added incorrect information and has been reverted or removed. All information in this encyclopedia must be verifiable in a reliable, published source. If you believe the information that you added was correct, please cite the references or sources or before making the changes, discuss them on the article's talk page. Please use the sandbox for any tests that you wish to make. Do take a look at the welcome page if you would like to learn more about contributing to our encyclopedia. Thank you. Cresix (talk) 02:38, 16 July 2010 (UTC)

Hi there, Please do not add Category:African American basketball players to categories where the article has neither an assertion of their heritage or a source stating it. Also, if an article is already in that category and thee is a claim and citation proving it, you don't need to add Category:American basketball players, since the AA category is already a subcategory of the American one. See WP:CAT if you have any other problems. If you could kindly undo your recent edits that added these uncited categories, that would be great. Thanks--TM 06:14, 17 July 2010 (UTC)

Well, they shouldn't be there unless a sources tells us they are AA or European American or any other ethnicity/race. If you could please remove the categories you added, that would be a help to Wikipedia.--TM 06:30, 17 July 2010 (UTC)

I didn't. Check your contributions page.--TM 06:35, 17 July 2010 (UTC)

Hello. I noticed that recently you had removed the college infobox on the Stephen Curry Wikipedia page. Although I can see how having multiple infoboxes may seem redundant, I believe that in this case it is necessary for several reasons. (1.) The primary infobox (NBA player) does not record Curry's list of NCAA statistics and records. (2.) All of Curry's major NCAA stats & records are not listed anywhere else on the page in their entirety (3.) The NCAA infobox does not interfere with other sections in the article (4.) There are examples of other pages on Wikipedia that use more than one infobox in order to cover all of a person's major highlights (i.e.: Bo Jackson, Charlie Ward and Rob Pelinka). Please let me know if you feel that it is more beneficial to the quality of the article to remove the college infobox. Thank you! --Djrun (talk) 21:24, 31 July 2010 (UTC)

Hi, I reverted your edits to Darren Collison and Courtney Lee, as the trade deal has not been officially confirmed. We usually wait until the teams and the players themselves announce the trade rather than vague "league sources". Thanks, Dabomb87 (talk) 19:20, 11 August 2010 (UTC)

A tag has been placed on Anthony Davis (basketball) 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 about a person, organization (band, club, company, etc.) or 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. 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. --moreno oso (talk) 02:27, 14 August 2010 (UTC)

I have nominated Anthony Davis (basketball), 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/Anthony Davis (basketball). 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. --moreno oso (talk) 02:57, 14 August 2010 (UTC)

Re your message: Another editor commented in the AfD and I think their comments are correct in that the general notability guideline takes precedence. As for suggestions on keeping the article, the first and most important thing to do is find as many additional sources as you can about him. I know there are already several sources included, but a couple more may be helpful, especially regarding the lawsuit. I suspect that there are a few more out there for the lawsuit, but if you can find others about him that's good, too. Try to stick with mainstream news sources (like ESPN and Chicago Tribune) instead of lesser known ones (like The Big Lead). If you spread the citations from around from multiple sources, that's good, too. As for the AfD itself, try not to argue with editors or point out other articles that exist (that isn't valid reason to keep an article). Instead, after adding in some additional sources, add in a comment that you have added in an additional 2/3/4/... sources. Keep your comments short and to the point. -- Gogo Dodo (talk) 05:40, 15 August 2010 (UTC)

Re your message: No, it is too early for the AfD to close. AfDs are open for seven days or sometimes longer. They are only closed early if there is an overwhelmingly clear consensus or some other procedural issue. There isn't an overwhelmingly clear consensus here. It not being commented on for a few days is not unusual for AfDs. -- Gogo Dodo (talk) 07:16, 17 August 2010 (UTC)

Re your message: I left them a warning and reverted the latest edits. Reports of vandalism go to WP:AIV, but the editors in question must be sufficiently warned before any admin action is taken. -- Gogo Dodo (talk) 17:52, 16 August 2010 (UTC)

A tag has been placed on Manny Machado, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G4 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be a repost of material that was previously deleted following a deletion debate, such as at articles for deletion. Under the specified criteria, where an article has substantially identical content to that of an article deleted after debate, and any changes in the content do not address the reasons for which the material was previously deleted, it may be deleted at any time.

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. --moreno oso (talk) 05:33, 17 August 2010 (UTC)

Re your message: I see that the AfD was closed as a close call delete. As with the other articles you have asked me about, it's all about sources. The more sources and the wider the coverage, the better (there's a couple of them in the middle of the AfD that may be helpful). In this particular case, while I could weigh in one way or another on the CSD, it is probably not a good idea for me to do so since you asked for my assistance. If the reviewing admin decides that the CSD is valid and deletes the article, you can either ask that admin for clarification on what they think would fix the issues brought up in the AfD closure. Or you can request a deletion review on the article. If the CSD is declined, well, then there really isn't a problem anymore. =) -- Gogo Dodo (talk) 06:57, 17 August 2010 (UTC)

Re your message: You need check in with User:Graeme Bartlett before requesting a deletion review since he did the CSD deletion. Ask him to review the article again, reconsider the deletion, and/or provide some feedback to you about it. -- Gogo Dodo (talk) 05:26, 18 August 2010 (UTC)

As he has now signed with the Orioles, it seems only a matter of time before he meets notability guidelines. I could email you a copy to await that time. Perhaps we can get it moved to your user space. Dlohcierekim 16:29, 18 August 2010 (UTC)

See User:Icealien33/Manny Machado. Improve it there till the notability article is resolved. I should think that will be after he's played. See WP:MLB/N. Dlohcierekim 16:43, 18 August 2010 (UTC)

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:NbaLive 10 Lebron screen.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Mosmof (talk) 03:56, 19 August 2010 (UTC)

Re your message: It was fine, though you might want to note that the notability of the game isn't established and WP:CRYSTAL may apply. Or you can leave the proposed deletion as is, see how it goes, and then pursue an AfD if necessary. -- Gogo Dodo (talk) 05:22, 21 August 2010 (UTC)

That was a poorly placed tag with an invalid CSD criterion, which I have removed. Please take a moment to look at WP:CSD again. "They cover only the cases specified in the rules below," states the page in the first paragraph. WP:WIHS provides some insight on new page patrol in general and explains in more detail why it is not a good idea to liberally apply the CSD policy. You may certainly PROD the article or bring it to AFD, but in the future, please remember that CSD only applies to what is explicitly stated at WP:CSD. Thanks, Airplaneman ✈ 06:46, 22 August 2010 (UTC)

Hi Icealien. I noticed this 'cause your talk is on my watch list.Wikipedia:OUTCOMES#Broadcast_media states, " Licensed radio and TV stations are generally kept [at AFD] as notable if they broadcast over the air and originate at least a portion of their programming schedule in their own studios. For more detail, you might see Wikipedia:Notability_(media)#Broadcast_media. Yours, Dlohcierekim 14:21, 22 August 2010 (UTC)

Sorry I pressed the wrong button and put up Ellen Marriage before I meant to. It will be about 10 lines long by midday and I expect to do about twenty lines in all. She was the first English translator to tackle the complete works of Balzac, etc. Quite a girl. Blessings, Bmcln1 (talk) 07:07, 23 August 2010 (UTC)

Please now peruse Ellen Marriage and label as you think appropriate. Cheers. Bmcln1 (talk) 08:07, 23 August 2010 (UTC)

Hello Icealien33. Thanks for the speedy deletion work you are doing; it's a very important activity! I did want to let you know, though, regarding San ramon national high school, that current consensus holds that it is bad practice to tag articles for speedy deletion as lacking context (CSD A1) or content (CSD A3) moments after creation, as users may be actively working on the article content. Ten to fifteen minutes is considered a good time to wait before tagging such articles under either of these criteria. Please note that before an appropriate waiting period is over, the articles should not be marked as patrolled, so that the wait does not result in the article escaping review at a later time. Nothing here is meant to apply to any other criterion; attack pages and copyright violations especially should be tagged and deleted immediately. Thanks. CIreland (talk) 09:00, 23 August 2010 (UTC)

Hello Icealien33. I am just letting you know that I have converted the speedy deletion tag that you placed on Dav school adambakkam to a proposed deletion tag, because I do not believe CSD applies to the page in question. Thank you. Kimchi.sg (talk) 15:26, 23 August 2010 (UTC)

Hi, you probably noticed I recently declined your speedy deletion nomination of this page since the article appears to indicate sufficient context. Please be aware that it is not necessary for me to add a hangon tag, as I am not the creator. Any other editor may remove the speedy deletion tag, as speedy deletion is for uncontroversial deletion only. If you think that the article should be deleted, please take it to AfD. Thanks. GiftigerWunsch [TALK] 21:36, 23 August 2010 (UTC)

Hello, ZooBlazer. You have new messages at Giftiger wunsch's talk page.
Message added 21:44, 23 August 2010 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Hy Icealien33, just wanted to give you a heads up that I declined your CSD of Bengalia africana because the article does give enough context to identify this as a species of Bengalia. Normally I would have converted the A1 tag to an A7 tag because the article provides no indication of notability but in this case I can't because WP:CSD#A7 states, "This criterion does not apply to species of animals, only to individual animal(s)." With that being said I recommend if you wish to nominate this further you use WP:AFD, as this is a more tricky case. -Marcusmax(speak) 22:25, 23 August 2010 (UTC)

Hi Icealien, I have declined your speedy deletion request for Seatack Elementary, as it does not appear to be "pure vandalism" as stated by speedy deletion criterion G3. Please consider using the proposed deletion or articles for deletion processes instead. Thanks, Dabomb87 (talk) 22:55, 23 August 2010 (UTC)

Hello, ZooBlazer. You have new messages at Ttonyb1's talk page.
Message added 04:30, 24 August 2010 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Heh, though this lacks content in the narrative, it does certainly assert significance in the info box and with his publication history. Dlohcierekim 01:47, 25 August 2010 (UTC)

Re your message: Videos can be reliable sources, but it all depends where they are sourced from. Television show episodes or web clips hosted on the network's website could probably be considered reliable. There are actually two citation templates that one can use: {{cite video}} and {{cite episode}}. There's a working draft of proposed guideline at Wikipedia:Videos as references that covers the topic. Now mind you, this isn't an official guideline or policy at this time, but it makes some good points in my opinion. -- Gogo Dodo (talk) 03:40, 25 August 2010 (UTC)

I declined your speedy deletion request (A1) for Ad librum, as the subject of the article was quite clear. Use PROD or AFD instead. Dabomb87 (talk) 21:31, 25 August 2010 (UTC)

Hi, I'm Airplaneman. I wouldn't say it's a G1 (this explains more of my logic). I'm inclined to reject the tag, but I'll leave it to another admin to decide. If anything, you should re-tag with another more suitable CSD tag (G2, maybe?). I'll be watching the page. Regards, Airplaneman ✈ 23:46, 25 August 2010 (UTC)

Alright then, it's been deleted anyways. Nice to meet you, BTW. Airplaneman ✈ 23:47, 25 August 2010 (UTC)

I have nominated 2012 NBA Draft, 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/2012 NBA Draft. 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. Jrcla2 (talk) 19:21, 29 August 2010 (UTC)

Hello there! I saw your speedy deletion tag of Glenn Beck prefix:Wikipedia:Neutral point of view/Noticeboard. You tagged it with G2, which is for test pages. However, you should know that that's not appropriate for that page. That page was obviously created in error. The better thing to do would be to move that text to the correct place (Wikipedia:Neutral point of view/Noticeboard) and then tag the article with the G6 tag. I've already moved the text and deleted the page, so no worries about doing it for this one. Just for future notice. Thanks for your work! — GorillaWarfare ^talk 00:19, 30 August 2010 (UTC)

Hi Icealien33 - I just wanted to give you a heads-up that I just went through and deleted college player categories and college/conference infobox data from several articles you created, such as Michael Gilchrist. Technically, the "Kentucky Wildcats men's basketball players" category (and other schools) should only be applied to people who have played at least one varsity game for that school. I didn't remove them from current NCAA freshmen (and guys like Harrison Barnes and Brandon Knight have at least played exhibitions in their new uniforms), but for recruits who won't set foot on campus for a year it is premature. We have seen a lot of crazy things happen late in recruiting so you can't be sure anyone will make it on campus, or through eligibility (I'm talking to you, Enes Kanter) between now and 2011-12. I also removed infobox info stating that these players are members of these teams for the same reasons. I just didn't want you to think I was nitpicking your work - there is a method to the madness. Take care Rikster2 (talk) 13:46, 11 September 2010 (UTC)

You tagged Aragüés Aragonese for speedy deletion two minutes after it was created. Why? It's a perfectly good article it seems to me. Even if it isn't, it certainly merits discussion. Speedy tags are only for obvious nonsense and garbage. Herostratus (talk) 14:19, 17 September 2010 (UTC)

Your addition to CSI: Crime Scene Investigation (season 11) has been removed, as it appears to have added copyrighted material to Wikipedia without permission from the copyright holder. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other websites or printed material; such additions will be deleted. You may use external websites or publications as a source of information, but not as a source of article content such as sentences or images. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing.

Sorry about the template, but it seems to me that (after all your time on WP) you should already know that copying and pasting texts as you have for the episode descriptions is a copyright violation. I invite you to write new descriptions in your own words; they will undoubtedly be better than the deliberately rough replacement blurbs I had in there. — JohnFromPinckney (talk) 04:18, 28 September 2010 (UTC)

Just to explain my thinking: I've always felt that those stats are something other websites can handle much better. Stats sections can become misleading if they're not updated after each game. Plus, IPs always, always screw things up by editing one field while ignoring all the rest. I'm starting to think we should just get rid of all the stats sections until the players retire. Zagalejo^^^ 04:38, 29 October 2010 (UTC)

Well, the IPs generally don't update the date, either. :) Really, do you think the stats are worth the trouble? It just seems like a lot of tedious work for something that can be found in more useful forms all over the internet. Zagalejo^^^ 05:31, 29 October 2010 (UTC)