From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Contents 1 January 2008 1.1 Heterosocial 1.2 Please tell me!!! 1.3 AfD nomination of Heterosocial 2 March 2008 2.1 Bioelectrography 2.2 GI glasses 3 April 2008 3.1 Speedy deletion of Hero for a Day

[edit] January 2008

[edit] Heterosocial

Another editor has added the "{{prod}}" template to the article Heterosocial, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but the editor doesn't believe it satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and has explained why in the article (see also Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not and Wikipedia:Notability). Please either work to improve the article if the topic is worthy of inclusion in Wikipedia or discuss the relevant issues at its talk page. If you remove the {{prod}} template, the article will not be deleted, but note that it may still be sent to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. BJBot (talk) 00:44, 9 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Please tell me!!!

ARE you finally over your thing for, let us say inappropriate girls? I was hoping maybe you grew out of it!! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jmm6f488 (talk • contribs) 12:59, 9 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] AfD nomination of Heterosocial

An editor has nominated Heterosocial, an article on which you have worked or that you created, for deletion. We appreciate your contributions, but the nominator doesn't believe that the article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion and has explained why in his/her nomination (see also "What Wikipedia is not").

Your opinions on whether the article meets inclusion criteria and what should be done with the article are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Heterosocial and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~).

You may also edit the article during the discussion to improve it but should not remove the articles for deletion template from the top of the article; such removal will not end the deletion debate. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 06:44, 10 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] March 2008

[edit] Bioelectrography

A proposed deletion template has been added to the article Bioelectrography, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. 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. Also, please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. 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. If you agree with the deletion of the article, and you are the only person who has made substantial edits to the page, please add {{db-author}} to the top of Bioelectrography. RJC ^{Talk Contribs} 18:01, 10 March 2008 (UTC)

Well, one thing that might save the article from meriting a PROD deletion would be if you could point out a place (other than Korotkov's work) that discusses the field. Even a reputable source slamming the field of Bioelectrography specifically (i.e., not as one example among many pseudo-scientific disciplines) would satisfy WP:FRINGE and make the topic notable and verifiable. If you think you can do this, you can simply remove the PROD tag. I would then relist the article under Wikipedia:Articles for Deletion, but if you think that this article should not be deleted then you should by all means contest the PROD and compel an AfD discussion.

If you have an interest in this article, you might also be interested to know that there is currently an AfD underway for Konstantin Korotkov at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Konstantin Korotkov. RJC ^{Talk Contribs} 19:51, 10 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] GI glasses

A proposed deletion template has been added to the article GI glasses, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. 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. Also, please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. 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. If you agree with the deletion of the article, and you are the only person who has made substantial edits to the page, please add {{db-author}} to the top of GI glasses. It is a complete duplicate of Birth Control Glasses. I've already copied those few unique ideas over to the latter article, and the former has no further redeeming value. An alternative exists: we could turn GI glasses into a redirect to Birth Control Glasses. bahamut0013♠♣ 00:31, 25 March 2008 (UTC)

I have to say that I have no real problem going either way. If you feel that GI glasses should be kept and BCG made the redirect, then I will not object. As far as I am concerned, they are both slang terms, and while I think BCG has a more interesting name due to the humor of it, it does seem a less... official, for lack of a better term. So, by all means, do as you like and I will not attempt to stop or revert you; but if you haven't moved either way by the time May rolls around, I will act upon my own preference (assuming lack of interest in all other parties). bahamut0013♠♣ 00:07, 28 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] April 2008

[edit] Speedy deletion of Hero for a Day

A tag has been placed on Hero for a Day 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 a band, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is notable: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, articles that do not indicate the subject's importance or significance may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable, as well as our subject-specific notability guideline for musical topics.

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 (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 article 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 article that would would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the article does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that a copy be emailed to you. TheMile (talk) 23:18, 5 April 2008 (UTC)

I don't remember exactly, but I think someone had hijacked Hero for a Day for some non notable band. That's what I nominated for deletion; I guess some admin restored it to a redirect. Sorry about the confusion. You can safely disregard the message. TheMile (talk) 00:27, 7 April 2008 (UTC)