User talk:Vegaswikian/Archives/2016

This is an archive of past discussions with User:Vegaswikian. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

COASTIE I am (talk) 00:40, 2 March 2016 (UTC)

An article that you have been involved in editing—Black pudding —has been proposed for merging with another article. If you are interested, please participate in the merger discussion. Thank you. Hairy Dude (talk) 01:31, 7 March 2016 (UTC)

The article Thank You for Smoking (disambiguation) has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Unnecessary disambiguation page per WP:TWODABS.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. GeoffreyT2000 (talk) 15:25, 13 March 2016 (UTC)

Hi, Vegaswikian. I see from its history that you've edited the Hilton Worldwide article many times. I was wondering if you had a moment to assist me with a request I added to the article's talk page with a few small infobox updates. I can't edit the article directly due to a COI, but I've proposed 3 corrections and provided sourcing and formatted citations to make the request easy to process. If you have a minute to assist, I'd be really grateful. Thanks for considering. Inkian Jason (talk) 17:00, 25 March 2016 (UTC)

Actually, please disregard the above comment. My request has been answered and the article has been updated accordingly. I did, however, post a second request on the article's talk page, if you are available to help. Inkian Jason (talk) 19:27, 28 March 2016 (UTC)

Category:Mayors of Cranford, New Jersey, which you created, has been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. A discussion is taking place to see if it abides with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. ...William, is the complaint department really on the roof? 12:07, 31 March 2016 (UTC)

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Tun Haji Abdul Razak Bin Hussein. Since you had some involvement with the Tun Haji Abdul Razak Bin Hussein redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. Alexander Iskandar (talk) 06:00, 21 April 2016 (UTC)

The article Grand opening has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Article does not cite any sources nor make a claim to notability.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. TM 13:01, 29 May 2016 (UTC)

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Four Seasons Hotel Las Vegas. Since you had some involvement with the Four Seasons Hotel Las Vegas redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. -- Tavix ^(talk) 07:22, 11 June 2016 (UTC)

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Grand opening 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/Grand opening 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 notice from the top of the article. MSJapan (talk) 08:32, 20 June 2016 (UTC)

I have just noticed the discussion which you closed at Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2013 June 14, and now the categories are an absolute mess. It has confused different denominations - the (defunct) Dutch Reformed Church in the Netherlands, and the Dutch Reformed Church in South Africa (which is actually two denominations). The category Category:American members of the Dutch Reformed Church is technically correct, though I have no idea we are splitting up denominational membership by nationality. We don't, for example, have Category:French Southern Baptists. Anyway, the main problem is the mixup with the phrase "Dutch Reformed Church". StAnselm (talk) 18:21, 21 June 2016 (UTC)

Sorry, I have just realised this is a very old discussion. I don't why I never noticed the discrepancy before. Anyway, my solution is to move Category:South African members of the Dutch Reformed Church to Category:Members of the Dutch Reformed Church in South Africa; merge Category:American members of the Dutch Reformed Church and Category:Dutch members of the Dutch Reformed Church into Category:Members of the Dutch Reformed Church, and delete Category:Members of the Dutch Reformed Church by nationality. Are you able to do that, or do I need to go to CfD?

Since, in fact, you haven't been active for a year, I'll head over to CfD... StAnselm (talk) 18:35, 21 June 2016 (UTC)

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect SkyWest. Since you had some involvement with the SkyWest redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. SSTflyer 12:31, 20 July 2016 (UTC)

Two years ago ...

more specific category
... you were recipient no. 944 of Precious, a prize of QAI!

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 05:28, 12 August 2016 (UTC)

There's a new Categories for Renaming discussion going on about categories of US cities listed in the AP Stylebook. As you have participated in at least one of the more recent discussions in the subject, you may want to participate in the discussion at Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2016 August 17#Seattle. עוד מישהו Od Mishehu 20:38, 17 August 2016 (UTC)

Please see my proposal to speedily rename Category:19th-century Church of Ireland church buildings etc Hugo999 (talk) 12:49, 27 August 2016 (UTC)

Following a community discussion in June 2011, consensus was reached to provisionally suspend the administrative permissions of users who have been inactive for one year (i.e. administrators who have not made any edits or logged actions in more than one year). As a result of this discussion, your administrative permissions will be removed pending your return if you do not return to activity within the next month. If you wish to have these permissions reinstated should this occur, please post to the Wikipedia:Bureaucrats' noticeboard and the userright will be restored per the re-sysopping process (i.e. as long as the attending bureaucrats are reasonably satisfied that your account has not been compromised, that your inactivity did not have the effect of evading scrutiny of any actions which might have led to sanctions, and that you have not been inactive for a three-year period of time). If you remain inactive for a three-year period of time, including the present year you have been inactive, you will need to request reinstatement at WP:RFA. This removal of access is procedural only, and not intended to reflect negatively upon you in any way. We wish you the best in future endeavors, and thank you for your past administrative efforts. MadmanBot (talk) 01:30, 1 September 2016 (UTC)

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. This is a notice that the page you created, Template:Airport destination list/test, was tagged as a test page under section G2 of the criteria for speedy deletion and has been or soon may be deleted. Please use the sandbox for any other tests you want to do. Take a look at the welcome page if you would like to learn more about contributing to our encyclopedia.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. MrLinkinPark333 (talk) 16:41, 2 September 2016 (UTC)

I have just made a new nomination for renaming categories for those U.S cities where the article doesn't include the state name. Since you participated in a recent discussion about this, you may want to express your opinion at Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2016 September 6#Major US cities. עוד מישהו Od Mishehu 16:19, 6 September 2016 (UTC)

You have been mentioned at Wikipedia:Missing Wikipedians. Ottawahitech (talk) 16:09, 8 September 2016 (UTC)please ping me

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Las Vegas metropolitan area. Since you had some involvement with the Las Vegas metropolitan area redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. -- Tavix ^(talk) 16:16, 9 September 2016 (UTC)

Hello, Vegaswikian. This message is intended to notify administrators of important changes to the protection policy.

Extended confirmed protection (also known as "30/500 protection") is a new level of page protection that only allows edits from accounts at least 30 days old and with 500 edits. The automatically assigned "extended confirmed" user right was created for this purpose. The protection level was created following this community discussion with the primary intention of enforcing various arbitration remedies that prohibited editors under the "30 days/500 edits" threshold to edit certain topic areas.

In July and August 2016, a request for comment established consensus for community use of the new protection level. Administrators are authorized to apply extended confirmed protection to combat any form of disruption (e.g. vandalism, sock puppetry, edit warring, etc.) on any topic, subject to the following conditions:

• Extended confirmed protection may only be used in cases where semi-protection has proven ineffective. It should not be used as a first resort.
• A bot will post a notification at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard of each use. MusikBot currently does this by updating a report, which is transcluded onto the noticeboard.

Please review the protection policy carefully before using this new level of protection on pages. Thank you.
This message was sent to the administrators' mass message list. To opt-out of future messages, please remove yourself from the list. 17:49, 23 September 2016 (UTC)

Following a community discussion in June 2011, consensus was reached to provisionally suspend the administrative permissions of users who have been inactive for one year (i.e. administrators who have not made any edits or logged actions in more than one year). As a result of this discussion, your administrative permissions will be removed pending your return if you do not return to activity within the next several days. If you wish to have these permissions reinstated should this occur, please post to the Wikipedia:Bureaucrats' noticeboard and the userright will be restored per the re-sysopping process (i.e. as long as the attending bureaucrats are reasonably satisfied that your account has not been compromised, that your inactivity did not have the effect of evading scrutiny of any actions which might have led to sanctions, and that you have not been inactive for a three-year period of time). If you remain inactive for a three-year period of time, including the present year you have been inactive, you will need to request reinstatement at WP:RFA. This removal of access is procedural only, and not intended to reflect negatively upon you in any way. We wish you the best in future endeavors, and thank you for your past administrative efforts. — xaosflux ^Talk 23:56, 27 September 2016 (UTC)

Following a community discussion in June 2011, consensus was reached to provisionally suspend the administrative permissions of users who have been inactive for one year (i.e. administrators who have not made any edits or logged actions in more than one year). As a result of this discussion, your administrative permissions have been removed pending your return. If you wish to have these permissions reinstated, please post to the Wikipedia:Bureaucrats' noticeboard and the userright will be restored per the re-sysopping process (i.e. as long as the attending bureaucrats are reasonably satisfied that your account has not been compromised, that your inactivity did not have the effect of evading scrutiny of any actions which might have led to sanctions, and that you have not been inactive for a three-year period of time). If you remain inactive for a three-year period of time, including the present year you have been inactive, you will need to request reinstatement at WP:RFA. This removal of access is procedural only, and not intended to reflect negatively upon you in any way. We wish you the best in future endeavors, and thank you for your past administrative efforts. — xaosflux ^Talk 00:28, 1 October 2016 (UTC)

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Template:Hong Kong. Since you had some involvement with the Template:Hong Kong redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. - CHAMPION ^{(talk) (contributions) (logs)} 01:35, 26 November 2016 (UTC)

Hello Vegaswikian,

I wanted to let you know that I just tagged The NRL Footy Show for deletion, because it doesn't appear to contain any encyclopedic content. Take a look at our suggestions for essential content in short articles to learn what should be included.

If you feel that the article shouldn't be deleted and want more time to work on it, you can contest this deletion, but please don't remove the speedy deletion tag from the top.

You can leave a note on my talk page if you have questions. Satdeep Gill (talk • contribs 07:57, 11 December 2016 (UTC)

From the icy Canajian north; to you and yours! FWiW Bzuk (talk) 20:11, 25 December 2016 (UTC)

Category:15th-century Anglican churches, which you created, has been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. A discussion is taking place to see if it abides with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. JarrahTree 14:59, 30 December 2016 (UTC)