User talk:Lupus648: Difference between revisions
→Your edits: reply |
PROD nomination of Lithuanian Union of Russians. (TW) |
||
Line 75: | Line 75: | ||
|} |
|} |
||
|}<!--Template:Welcomeg--> |
|}<!--Template:Welcomeg--> |
||
==Proposed deletion of Lithuanian Union of Russians== |
|||
[[Image:Ambox warning yellow.svg|left|48px|]] |
|||
A [[Wikipedia:Proposed deletion|proposed deletion]] template has been added to the article [[Lithuanian Union of Russians]], suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process  because of the following concern: |
|||
:<b>This is duplication: see Union of the Russians of Lithuania. The other article is older (see history); so I'd support deleting and/or redirecting the new one to the stub with longer page history.</b> |
|||
All contributions are appreciated, but this article may not satisfy Wikipedia's [[Wikipedia:Criteria for inclusion|criteria for inclusion]], and the deletion notice should explain why (see also "[[Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not|What Wikipedia is not]]" and [[Wikipedia:Deletion policy|Wikipedia's deletion policy]]). You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the <code>{{tl|dated prod}}</code> notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on [[Talk:Lithuanian Union of Russians|its talk page]]. |
|||
Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised because, even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the [[WP:PROD|proposed deletion process]], the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the [[Wikipedia:Criteria for speedy deletion|speedy deletion criteria]] or it can be sent to [[Wikipedia:Articles for deletion|Articles for Deletion]], where it may be deleted if [[Wikipedia:Consensus|consensus]] to delete is reached.<!-- Template:PRODWarning --> [[User:Miacek|<strong>Miacek</strong>]] [[User talk:Miacek|(t)]] 10:49, 26 June 2009 (UTC) |
Revision as of 10:49, 26 June 2009
...
Your edits
Hi, and thanks for your contributions. I noticed that you linked some dates recently. This practice is now deprecated. Please see WP:LINKING and WP:MOSNUM. Furthermore, there is an Arbcom restriction on mass linking/delinking of chronological elements, although this is no suggestion from me that you are in breach whatsoever. I'm happy to respond to any inquiries you may have about the matter. Thank you for your attention. Dabomb87 (talk) 15:24, 17 June 2009 (UTC)
- Ok, many thanks for your hint, I thought this was common practice. The linking of dates without a special importance (e.g. maybe "1968") is indeed not very useful. Lupus648 (talk) 16:06, 17 June 2009 (UTC)
- It was common practice until recently. Anyway, happy editing! Dabomb87 (talk) 16:18, 17 June 2009 (UTC)
Welcome!
|
Proposed deletion of Lithuanian Union of Russians
A proposed deletion template has been added to the article Lithuanian Union of Russians, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process because of the following concern:
- This is duplication: see Union of the Russians of Lithuania. The other article is older (see history); so I'd support deleting and/or redirecting the new one to the stub with longer page history.
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.
Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised because, 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. Miacek (t) 10:49, 26 June 2009 (UTC)