User talk:ChristTrekker/Archive 4

SGI IRIS 4D

Hello! I am doing some work on the Silicon Graphics Professional IRIS, Personal IRIS and PowerSeries computers. As you are the creator of the stub SGI IRIS 4D, I was wondering if you have an opinion on the article naming. The three aforementioned computers can be considered to be members of the IRIS 4D "family", but as far as I know, there is little similarity between them - their hardware and purpose are different. Thus, to cover those three computers in one article is a bad idea - there would be a lot of irrelevant content. I think that IRIS 4D article should be deleted, as redirecting it elsewhere is impossible. To replace it, three separate articles, one for each family should be created. Regards, Rilak (talk) 08:52, 5 March 2009 (UTC)

I know very little about it. I created the stub just to attach the template to, really, hoping someone else could flesh it out. ⇔ ChristTrekker 14:52, 5 March 2009 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Samples of display typefaces

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

Orphan, no context.

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. Darrenhusted (talk) 13:03, 10 July 2009 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Samples of simulation typefaces

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

Orphan, no context, collection of redlinks.

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. Darrenhusted (talk) 13:03, 10 July 2009 (UTC)

Opposing deletion of Samples of display typefaces

I am opposing the deletion of Samples of display typefaces and the deletion of several other pages of samples. Please reply right here if you agree. --DThomsen8 (talk) 13:41, 10 July 2009 (UTC)

CfD nomination of Category:Paleoconservatives

See Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2009_October_20#Category:Paleoconservatives.   Will Beback  talk  05:51, 20 October 2009 (UTC)