I've noticed that you have added many requests to the Mythology section of the requests page. After going through many of these, I have noticed that several are definitley non-notable, while others do not seem to exist at all. Could you please leave at least one link by each request to help get other editors started. Also, it would certainly help if you created some of these pages yourself. Thank you, Kivar2 (talk) 17:43, 16 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

All are (or were) on one of the non-English equivalents to the List of legendary creatures. I added them to Requested Articles rather than starting the pages myself in the hopes of bringing them to the attention of editors familiar with the languages in question, since I couldn't determine if they were notable myself. I'll work on adding links to the non-English articles in question. Pfhreak (talk) 23:23, 29 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

This is done. All creatures in question have articles in the Dutch, French, German, or Italian Wikipedias. Pfhreak (talk) 17:27, 29 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Kivar2 (talk) 18:47, 25 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Please read this article. Despite the looseness of English, being in Category:Greek mythological giants requires more than large size: neither Orion nor Talos were earthborn or serpent-footed. A sub-category Category:Gigantes and a note of explanation at the present cat seems the simplest solution. Septentrionalis PMAnderson 17:40, 5 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• I have already read Gigantes. The English word "giant", despite descending through a complicated route from the Greek "gigantes", has become the generic term for superhumanly-large humanoids. I'm not sure if User:Fordmadoxfraud intended Category:Greek mythological giants to contain all giants or just gigantes, as there are no notes of any kind. I noticed that there was a category for Greek giants and moved the Greek giants into it. Adding Category:Gigantes makes sense to me, as Category:Cyclopses and Category:Titans already exist. For me the best organization would be: Category:Greek mythological giants, or Category:Greek giants by analogy with Category:Norse giants, as a subcategory of Category:Giants, then Category:Cyclopses, Category:Gigantes, and Category:Titans as subcategories of Category:Greek mythological giants/Category:Greek giants. Pfhreak (talk) 22:19, 5 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Cyclopes, if you don't mind. Let us use the correct plurals where English recognizes them.
    • Again, I didn't make or name the category, I'm just reporting what exists. Looking at the revision history for Category:Cyclopses and Category:Cyclopes, it looks like there's been some disagreement about which is preferred, so you'll probably want to start a discussion on the proper name on the talk page for the category. Pfhreak (talk) 22:19, 5 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Category:Norse giants is also made up of a single race of creature, not a mixture; Hygelac and Harold Hardraada were tall beyond normal mankind, but they are not in the cat. Septentrionalis PMAnderson 21:02, 5 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
    • Depends on if you count bergrisar, eldjötnar, and hrímthursar as all being part of the same race. Some of the stories treat them as three different races of giant beings, especially the eldjötnar, as they have a special role in starting Ragnarök. Similarly, cyclopes, titans, gegeenes, gigantes, and hecatonchires are all separate races of Greek giant. As for "giant" in the sense of unusually tall human vs. "giant" in the sense of mythical giant humanoid, "___ giant" categories are understood to be subcategories of mythical giants, while Category:People with gigantism covers the former. Pfhreak (talk) 22:19, 5 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I hope you're doing fine and I sincerely apologize for this intrusion. I've just read your profile and I saw that you're a learned and open-minded person deeply interested in reading, discovering culture, and improving your knowledge on diverse matters, so I suppose you know very well what are a minorized language and culture and maybe I am not bothering you and you will help us... I'm a member of a Catalan association "Amical de la Viquipèdia" which is trying to get some recognition as a Catalan Chapter but this hasn't been approved up to this moment because Catalan is not supported by a state even though our Association is working real hard. We would appreciate your support, visible if you stick this on your first page: Wikimedia CAT. Thanks again, wishing you a great summer, take care! Capsot (talk) 20:48, 17 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The article Gliese 169 has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Doesn't seem to meet WP:NASTRO. Although a few references do show up on SIMBAD and Google Scholar, every single one of them simply mentions the star in passing and does not research it.

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. StringTheory11 (t • c) 22:10, 15 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The article Gliese 505 has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Doesn't seem to meet WP:NASTRO.

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. StringTheory11 (t • c) 01:36, 29 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Gliese 902 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/Gliese 902 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. StringTheory11 (t • c) 03:42, 5 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Gliese 169 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/Gliese 169 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. StringTheory11 (t • c) 17:31, 11 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Gliese 453 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/Gliese 453 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. StringTheory11 (t • c) 21:39, 29 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Wolf 635 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/Wolf 635 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. StringTheory11 (t • c) 02:37, 1 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article HD 74576 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/HD 74576 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. StringTheory11 (t • c) 17:08, 25 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article HD 160346 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/HD 160346 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. StringTheory11 (t • c) 18:31, 7 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Pfhreak. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Pfhreak. Voting in the 2017 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2017 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Pfhreak. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Parandrus 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/Parandrus until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, 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 until the discussion has finished.

TNstingray (talk) 12:57, 19 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]