User talk:Sandstein/Archives/2006/September

Patent nonsense

While checking through the candidates for speedy deletion, I noticed that you tagged Fuse 3 comics with {{nonsense}}, the template corresponding to the "patent nonsense" speedy deletion criterion. However, only articles which contain no meaningful content should be speedily deleted under this criterion; poorly written content does not count as patent nonsense. May I suggest that you do not tag articles such as this as patent nonsense in the future.

For a fuller explanation, see Wikipedia:Patent nonsense. --bainer (talk) 08:22, 2 September 2006 (UTC)

Thanks. After a more thorough read, I guess there is some real-world sense to be made of this, but really not too much. Sandstein 11:10, 2 September 2006 (UTC)

Deletion of article web.py

You said that you deleted an article in accordance with Wikipedia's deletion policies. But I don't see what should be wrong with that article. Could you please explain why you deleted it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Valentinw (talk • contribs)

I didn't delete web.py, an administrator did. You recreated this previously deleted article, which means it can bee speedily re-deleted per WP:CSD. The original reason for deletion is in this AfD discussion: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Web.py. Sandstein 09:46, 5 September 2006 (UTC)

Ok, I didn't know it had been deleted before. But it's one of the major Python web frameworks [1] and has been referenced in two other articles. So why not start an article on it? Furthermore the AfD discussion took place in May and things can change pretty fast. -- Valentin 11:12, 5 September 2006 (UTC)

Per WP:CSD G4, speedy deletion is only possible for a "substantially identical" article and "not merely a new article on the same subject". So yes, you can recreate the article without fear of it being speedily deleted, if it is more than just a description of this framework, as it was before. The new article ought to demonstrate, with links to prove it, why web.py now meets the notability criteria of WP:SOFTWARE, i.e. why the prevailing arguments in the old AfD are no longer valid. If the article does not do this, it can be speedily deleted or could be resubmitted to AfD, depending on how "substantially identical" it is to the AfD-ed article. Sandstein 17:00, 5 September 2006 (UTC)

Indzhe

Thanks for your kind words on this AfD - they were appreciated. Dlyons493 Talk 01:15, 7 September 2006 (UTC)

Article for delection notification

This is just to notify you that I've nominated Long War (21st century), which you appear to have created, for deletion. Please see Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Long War (21st century). --Bobblehead 19:11, 14 September 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for the notification. Sandstein 19:51, 14 September 2006 (UTC)

AfD Insex

You voted "(provisional) delete" on Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Insex because of the lack of reliable sources. I added three more sources, so I was wondering if you still consider them insufficient or if you just didn't look at it yet. Sloan21 17:30, 18 September 2006 (UTC)

Proposed merge of pointe shoes

I was wondering what your reasoning is behind wanting to merge pointe shoes into en pointe. The two are rather discrete subjects, with the shoe itself having as much of a history and tradition as the technique. If length is the reason, I do intend to expand them at some point (hopefully sooner rather than later). I'd like to hear your reasoning, seeing as no notes were left on either talk page. Cheers! --Keitei (talk) 22:57, 19 September 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for the message. I've addressed this on Talk:En pointe. Sandstein 05:07, 20 September 2006 (UTC)

Article Deleted: Famous_Kapus

Hello,

Why was this article Deleted Please restore this Article..I was the one who created this Article. The names of People mentioned in this Article show the History of the Hindu caste!!!which is almost 2000 years old.. Some of the personalitied mentioned in the Page belong to the 4th Century A.D. and are also eminent Poets..

Most of them were Politicians who broght Freedom to India and also were crucial in forming the state of Andhra Pradesh... Most of them might not be known internationally but are very well known Nationally and Regionally within India.

Regards Panel1 —Preceding unsigned comment added by Panel1 (talk • contribs)

Hello. Famous Kapus was deleted as a result of consensus of Wikipedia editors, not by me. For the reason this article was deleted, please see Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Famous_Kapus. Please do not recreate the article with substantially identical content, as it will get re-deleted (see WP:CSD). If you think the deletion was in violation of process, you can appeal it at WP:DRV. But if you just disagree with the reason for deletion, you should have contributed to the deletion discussion. At any rate, I'm not an administrator and I therefore can't restore the article. If you still have a problem with the above, you could ask Jaranda, the administrator who actually deleted the article based on the deletion discussion result. Best regards, Sandstein 05:01, 28 September 2006 (UTC)

OK Thanks for the response. The question there are similar pages which hold informaiton about Famous pesonalities from other communities in Wikipedia... The question it why was only this page tagged for deletion!!! I would take it up with Jaranda... Thanks. Panel1

Icon of Coil

Per their entry on their record label's website ([2]), Icon of Coil is obviously notable, based on their positions on the Deutsche Alternative Charts. Why on earth did you think they were NN? I would ask that you remove your edits in regard to them, in case I miss any.--Eyrian 23:43, 29 September 2006 (UTC)

Because what you say is not in the article. The relevant guideline WP:BAND states clearly:

Also, please keep in mind that the article in question must actually document that the criterion is true. It is not enough to make vague claims in the article or assert a band's importance on a talk page or AfD page -- the article itself must document notability.

In particular, WP:BAND also notes that

An article that fails to even claim that the subject of the article is notable can be speedy deleted under criterion A7.

In fact, there is no actual claim to notability in the Icon of Coil article: the article does not say that the band has achieved some particular place in the charts. To sum up, a more appropriate response to my edits would have been to improve the article instead of complaining. If you do not, it may be speedily deleted, as noted above. Please note that any claim to notability must be backed up by reliable third-party sources. Best regards, Sandstein 05:14, 30 September 2006 (UTC)