User talk:PL Alvarez/Archive 2009

(Redirected from User talk:PL Alvarez/Archive 1)
Latest comment: 14 years ago by Stevedietrich in topic Much Better!

Diacritics edit

Please stop removing diacritics on the 2009 Legg Mason Tennis Classic draw pages. Diacritics are now used on tennis draws in wikipedia (see 2009 French Open, 2009 Wimbledon Championships - Gentlemen's Singles, 2009 MercedesCup - Singles) and there is no reason to remove them. I know some recent articles lack diacritics, but they should be added where they are not, instead of removed where they are. Thanks. --Don Lope (talk) 22:36, 4 August 2009 (UTC)Reply

User:TW-RF/Sandbox 5 edit

Hello PL Alvarez, I am going to be asking a couple of users to help on this in order to get this done because it is a big task that I can't get it done all on my own quickly! Just make sure to alert people before you start on a section by putting your signnature next to section number! Thanks!TW-RF (talk) 19:41, 10 September 2009 (UTC)Reply

Novak Djokovic edit

The Serbian spelling Novak Đoković redirects to the English spelling Novak Djokovic. If you want the article moved then go to Wikipedia:Requested moves. Please don't change links to the article name into links to the redirect. This is the English Wikipedia. His official English site [1] also spells his name in English. PrimeHunter (talk) 11:41, 6 October 2009 (UTC)Reply

Note that the archives of Talk:Novak Djokovic already has a lot of discussion about the name. PrimeHunter (talk) 11:48, 6 October 2009 (UTC)Reply
See also Wikipedia:Naming conventions#Use English words. I searched "Novak Đoković" in Google which also returns results on Djokovic. In the first 200 English hits I didn't see a single source outside Wikipedia which said Đoković, Dokovic or any other variation without j, so I am going to revert your changes. Many English speaking readers will probable never have seen him spelled without j and would be uncertain whether "N Đoković" is Novak Djokovic or somebody else with a similar name (I would have been uncertain before today). PrimeHunter (talk) 13:11, 6 October 2009 (UTC)Reply
I see you have also changed the spelling of titles of cited sources, for example from BBC Sport in [2]. I also revert that. PrimeHunter (talk) 13:23, 6 October 2009 (UTC)Reply

Your last article edit

Hi there PL Alvarez! That article you just created is looking pretty unorganized and lacking in information. If it isn't up to wikipedia standards soon, I may have to put it up for Speedy deletion. Cheers, --Stevedietrich (talk) 21:49, 30 December 2009 (UTC)Reply

Speedy deletion nomination of 2010 Qatar ExxonMobil Open - Singles edit

 

A tag has been placed on 2010 Qatar ExxonMobil Open - Singles requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a very short article providing little or no context to the reader. Please see Wikipedia:Stub for our minimum information standards for short articles. Also please note that articles must be on notable subjects and should provide references to reliable sources that verify their content. You may 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), 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.  IShadowed  ✰  22:02, 30 December 2009 (UTC)Reply

Much Better! edit

Wow you really turned that article around! It looks great! Well done, this article will certainly not meet CSD now! Cheers, --Stevedietrich (talk) 22:04, 30 December 2009 (UTC)Reply