User talk:Victor Lopes/2009 (October–December)

Weird one at Wong Wah-bo

Hi. :) I've removed your PROD tag from this, not because I disagree with you, but because it basically amounts to a second prodding of the same material. Strangely, a contributor pasted this here from a Wikipedia mirror of an article that had already been deleted by PROD, creating a kind of de-facto challenge. It seems a bit nutty to me, but I think the next proper step is AfD...which at least has the advantage of leaving the material G4able. Just wanted to explain. :) --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 21:39, 9 October 2009 (UTC)

Yes, that was quite strange, indeed...but I'll take it to AfD, since a Google search returned no relevant results. Thank you for the clearification.=) Victão Lopes ^{I hear you...} 00:28, 10 October 2009 (UTC)

EGÓ singles

If the singles were by a person who has an article here then A9 would not apply. It could be better to merge, but then they would be redirects, and not deleted. I have no knowledge whether EGÓ (band) is notable or not though. prod is what to tag with if the speedy delete A9 does not strictly apply, but you think it should go. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 20:27, 12 October 2009 (UTC)

Ira! image from Commons

Hi, I saw that you replaced the image on the Ira! article with one from commons. Are you sure though that the commons image is truly free? The description says it's been uploaded by the creator, but it looks like it's a professional photograph that has been scanned from a magazine or other publication, thus making it not really free since whoever scanned it isn't the real creator of the work. My concern is that the current image on WP will be deleted for being a non-free orphaned image and the Commons one might soon follow for not being truly free, thus leaving the article without any images. I'm not sure how copyright disputes work on Commons but I feel it'd be good to look into it. Cheers! XXX antiuser 19:04, 16 October 2009 (UTC)

As you endorsed the PROD...

...you may be interested in Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/No Bra (band), Lord Spongefrog, (I am the Czar of all Russias!) 15:55, 27 October 2009 (UTC)

I Walk These Streets and Holy Are You

Victor Lopes,

Why do you keep on erasing my Holy Are You and I Walk These Streets pages !? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Kai9er (talk • contribs) 18:49, 27 October 2009 (UTC)

deletion criteria

Speedy deletion for notability is only for articles making no claim whatever to notability. Saying someone has published books (other than self published books) is a plausible claim enough to pass WP:CSD. Promotional , G11, is reserved for articles serving primarily a promotional not informative purpose, that cannot be readily improved by normal editing. essentially, it has to read hopelessly like an advertisement to qualify for that. Please check WP:CSD and WP:Deletion policy for the guidelines. DGG ( talk ) 00:47, 6 November 2009 (UTC)

Traditional Circle of Indian Elders & Youth

After noting your comment on DGG's talk page I've been past the article above and given it a spring cleaning. There are plenty of Ghits testifying to it being a notably lobby organisation although I don't have the experience in Native American culture needed to use them appropriately in the article. Nevertheless you should find that the NPOV and sourcing issues have been addressed, possibly saving us from an unnecessary AfD procedure. - DustFormsWords (talk) 01:26, 6 November 2009 (UTC)

Magibon

I've re-nominated her for deletion.Pisomojado (talk) 06:49, 10 November 2009 (UTC)

RioGrandedoNorte-geo-stub

Normally stub categories are only created when there are 60+ articles that would be in the category. Until templates reach the 60 level we leave them upmerged into any category that would act as parent to the future category. When I created the templates there were just the 2 templates that were left upmerged, there were however a lot of articles that I couldn't place in different category. If you have any other questions on stubs don't hesitate to ask. Waacstats (talk) 22:42, 12 November 2009 (UTC)