Vertott

Welcome

Welcome!

Hello, Vertott, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

• The five pillars of Wikipedia
• Tutorial
• How to edit a page and How to develop articles
• How to create your first article (using the Article Wizard if you wish)
• Manual of Style

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your messages on discussion pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question on this page and then place {{helpme}} before the question. Again, welcome! Catfish Jim and the soapdish (talk) 20:57, 18 October 2010 (UTC)

Notability of bands.

It's credible claims of significance. If a band article fails WP:MUS by a large enough margin, I'll tend to apply WP:SNOW and list it for CSD. Usually the admins on New Page patrol agree with me. I've listed both articles at AFD since you disagree with me. Cheers, Catfish Jim and the soapdish (talk) 21:06, 18 October 2010 (UTC)

Rescue tagging

I notice you've been tagging some articles for rescue lately. In the future, when tagging articles for rescue, consider following the instructions at WP:ARS#Instructions. Specifically, I'm referring to this part: "As part of this tag's use, please comment at the deletion discussion on why this item should be rescued and how that could happen." SnottyWong ^confabulate 14:09, 19 October 2010 (UTC)

Sorry missed that part; I will do in future, thank you for the heads up. VERTott 14:11, 19 October 2010 (UTC)

Thanks, that's better. You don't even necessarily need to use one of the templates, you can just mention that you've tagged the article in your comments at the deletion discussion if you want. Thanks. SnottyWong ^confabulate 19:01, 19 October 2010 (UTC)

Schools

Hi, I've noticed you've been removing deletion templates from primary schools. This is just to let you know that we have an accepted standard procedure in what to do with primary school articles. The rule is simple: they are not notable, and articles can be deleted. What we usually do is to merge and redirect them without a fuss to the school district article (USA), or to the education section in the UK village, town, or city article. In the exceptional case where a primary school may have done something really extraordinary and might justify having a Wikipedia article, we put it through the AfD process where the community can decide what happens to it. Please take your time getting used to the many policies, rules, and guidelines around here, and if you would like any help, please don't hesitate to ask me on my talk page. Happy editing! --Kudpung (talk) 20:45, 19 October 2010 (UTC)

methods of deletion

Hi, you might like to take a moment and check out our policies and guidelines at WP:AfD, WP:PROD, WP:BLPPROD, WP:CSD, and WP:NOTABILITY before you warn the very admins who designed those policies  ;) If you need any help, don't hesitate to ask me on my talk page.--Kudpung (talk) 21:23, 19 October 2010 (UTC)

Which warning did I get wrong ? VERTott 21:24, 19 October 2010 (UTC)

I saw that too... WP:DTTR isn't policy, but it's a thought-provoking read. Catfish Jim and the soapdish (talk) 23:48, 19 October 2010 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, Vertott. You have new messages at Kudpung's talk page.
Message added 22:09, 19 October 2010 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Talkback

Hello, Vertott. You have new messages at Kudpung's talk page.
Message added 07:02, 20 October 2010 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Isulk'im

Would it save us both time and trouble if I just put all of the related articles up for AfD right now instead of trickling through prods for you to contest later? VernoWhitney (talk) 13:50, 21 October 2010 (UTC)

Oh, and please remember to substitute deprod using {{subst:Deprod}} when you place it. VernoWhitney (talk) 13:52, 21 October 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for that VERTott 14:13, 21 October 2010 (UTC)

Wolven Ancestry

Hello. I have no problem with removing prods but generally I would like to know why you removed it. The article in question only has one source, and it is not an article about the band but a press release the band sent to the Metal Underground publication. As such I think it fails wp:band. An afd is no problem but why remove a prod when no changes were made to the article? Beach drifter (talk) 02:20, 22 October 2010 (UTC)

Major Mohit Sharma, AC, SM

You say "Major in the army and medal winner is claim to significance." I beg to differ (and apparently so do the two toher admins who've deleted this page under A7 previously). There are plenty of majors in every army. It's a minor rank in the grand scheme of things and does not confer notability. There are also plenty of military medal winners who are simply not notable. WP:NOTMEMORIAL, we shouldn't have a page on every dead soldier who's won a medal. Strange Passerby (talk • contribs) 11:27, 29 October 2010 (UTC)

posts crossed VERTott 11:30, 29 October 2010 (UTC)

Notability

There is no rule that NASDAQ listings convey notability; there are some pretty obscure securities listed there. --Orange Mike | Talk 17:16, 17 November 2010 (UTC)

Sean Carver

I nominated Sean Carver for deletion at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Sean Carver for a lack of sources to pass WP:GNG. It has recently been revived from that deletion and you declined the A7 nom made by another editor. I'm pretty sure this is a recreation of that article, it still doesn't have the sources, and I think the re-creator is the original editor, who is probably COI'd. Grateful if you could check on the recreation and speedy on that basis if so. I will post a message on the recreating editor's talk. Bigger digger (talk) 10:14, 19 November 2010 (UTC)

And then I see the redlink and remember I prodded it. I'll be nomming it now...! Bigger digger (talk) 10:16, 19 November 2010 (UTC)

Your reversion

Re this reversion, I believe you are wrong. Only high schools are considered notable. There is no rule that "writing schools" are not eligible under A7. Regards, WWGB (talk) 12:17, 19 November 2010 (UTC)

Notability: vzRoom

Thank you very much for letting me know my mistakes and thank you for your time. I am sorry for being too new and too excited when I was making my first contribution to my most favorite website -- Wikipedia.

Receiving your notice, I immediately added back some references and citations and and tried to establish notability of the topic. Now the sources of citations are from famous TV program, newspaper, magazine, website and neutral organization. They all have online references. Are they useful to the topic? Please correct me again.

References

Alantypoon (talk) 02:31, 20 November 2010 (UTC)

Bahamian architects

Hello Vertott. Could you help me find some notable Bahamian architects, please? The only name currently listed there is Jean Albert Vanderpool - the content is unverifiable (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL). The article - as it is - has no value for Wikipedia. --Vejvančický (talk | contribs) 16:38, 21 November 2010 (UTC)

On a side note, despite the name of the article, it was eligible under {{db-A7}}, as the article was created for the purpose of inserting this not notable bio to Wikipedia. Just my opinion. It isn't so important. What is important: Are you planning to add some really notable names and improve the article? --Vejvančický (talk | contribs) 16:48, 21 November 2010 (UTC)

Hello, Vertott. You have new messages at Vejvančický's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Not English

You can get a fairly good idea of what the text's about by using the Google translation linked on the template. It's not suitable for direct use in an article, but you can get the general picture. Peridon (talk) 17:00, 21 November 2010 (UTC)

She's "the deputy managing director of the Privatization Agency" - doesn't look notable to me. I'm putting the bio tag back. Please leave it to an admin to decide on this. Peridon (talk) 17:12, 21 November 2010 (UTC)

An admin won't just delete it out of hand - they'll do what I did and what you can do - look at the rough translation. Peridon (talk) 17:14, 21 November 2010 (UTC)

Do not delete talk page contributions of other users

Whether by accident or otherwise you deleted my post on the following page: [1] Please be more careful in future. Jammy07 (talk) 01:30, 21 May 2011 (UTC)

RE: Wikipedia:In the news/Candidates‎‎

Yeah, uh, please use the one that's already there, and suggest improvements to that effect. This is the standard practice at ITN/C.  狐 Déan rolla bairille!  23:11, 23 May 2011 (UTC)

Frankly I couldn't give half a toss if it's listed. That's how we do things.  狐 Déan rolla bairille!  23:23, 23 May 2011 (UTC)

Oh, and you should probably read up on our central policies before you go around blindly accusing folk.  狐 Déan rolla bairille!  23:34, 23 May 2011 (UTC)

Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Cricket#My two cents

Hi,

Can I ask you the same question that I have asked Johnlp and Andrew nixon can you be clear, what do you both think the guildlines on club teams should say ? Should they stay as they are ? Should it be clarified that they only apply to English and Australian club teams? should all mention of club teams be removed ? or do you favour another form of words should be used. ? Mtking (talk) 21:29, 21 June 2011 (UTC)

Kahn and the maid

Hi - a thread has been opened at the BLP noticeboard about your attempting to name the maid in the two associated wikipedia articles - please don't replace it without consensus again - discussion is here Wikipedia:BLPN#DSK and the maid (again) - thanks. Off2riorob (talk) 11:20, 25 July 2011 (UTC)

July 2011

Hi, Vertott, thank you for using the {{rescue}} tag, the main organizing tool for the Article Rescue Squadron!

BusterD (talk) 16:35, 27 July 2011 (UTC)

DRV

A notification that the Templates for Discussion discussion (oy, repetition) has been taken to a deletion review discussion. The Article Rescue Squadron was notified, and as notifications to previous involved parties isn't normal practise, I and a few ARS members agreed that, in the interests of transparency and fairness, we should let everyone know...hence this talkpage message ;).

If anyone has an issue with me sending these out, do drop me a note on my talkpage. Regards, Ironholds (talk) 10:30, 28 January 2012 (UTC)