Mamclelland

A cupcake for you!

Thanks for continuing on Wikipedia! Sub specie aeternitatis (talk) 17:56, 18 February 2012 (UTC)

Repost of Spurensicherung Art

A tag has been placed on Spurensicherung Art requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia, because it appears to be a repost of material that was previously deleted following a deletion process. If you can indicate how it is different from the previously posted material, contest the deletion by clicking on the button that looks like this: which appears inside of the speedy deletion ({{db-...}}) tag (if no such tag exists, the page is no longer a speedy delete candidate). Doing so will take you to the talk page where you will find a pre-formatted place for you to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. You can also visit the page's discussion directly to give your reasons, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion, it may be deleted without delay. Administrators will consider your reasoning before deciding what to do with the page. If you believe the original discussion was unjustified, please contact the administrator who deleted the page or use deletion review instead of recreating the page. Thank you. TheLongTone (talk) 17:15, 7 April 2012 (UTC)

....If this is your essay (which I saw apperar on WP a few days ago in identical form) you really need to clean it up so that it actually makes sense. If you don't want it blown away. Again. If the people at your college accept this kind of stuff in an essay we are all doomed. Is it art or is it archaeology, for starters. Say more in less words, pleaseTheLongTone (talk) 17:15, 7 April 2012 (UTC)

Nomination of Spurensicherung Art for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Spurensicherung Art is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Spurensicherung Art until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion template from the top of the article. Peridon (talk) 17:52, 7 April 2012 (UTC)

The post above this section was incorrect in its premise - this hadn't previously been deleted after a discussion. I feel that discussion is needed, and have posted it at Articles for Deletion. This isn't a kiss of death - it's a chance to bring the article into a discussion area, where you are very welcome to participate. Sometimes changes are recommended to articles, sometimes they're kept as they are, sometimes, unfortunately, they are found not to fit in with the encyclopaedia. (I sometimes think it should be 'Articles for Discussion' as a title.) Peridon (talk) 17:59, 7 April 2012 (UTC)