| Revision as of 05:45, 24 October 2008 editImnotacoolguy (talk | contribs)40 edits →The Roadents← Previous edit | Revision as of 17:29, 24 October 2008 edit undoMichaelQSchmidt (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users60,150 edits →The RoadentsNext edit → | ||
| Line 2: | Line 2: | ||
| This is not an advertisement and none of my damn articles are advertisements. It also doesn't matter if an article is a stub. I have also added your AFD nomination to the log and fixed it since you did it wrong. ](])</small> 23:53, 23 October 2008 (UTC) | This is not an advertisement and none of my damn articles are advertisements. It also doesn't matter if an article is a stub. I have also added your AFD nomination to the log and fixed it since you did it wrong. ](])</small> 23:53, 23 October 2008 (UTC) | ||
| :Don't you curse towards me young man.. The stub was a bunch of useless information.. It should be deleted! It's not notable enough to deserve a wikipedia entry... ] (]) 05:45, 24 October 2008 (UTC) | :Don't you curse towards me young man.. The stub was a bunch of useless information.. It should be deleted! It's not notable enough to deserve a wikipedia entry... ] (]) 05:45, 24 October 2008 (UTC) | ||
| ::Schuym1 may be perhaps suggesting that he feels it is up to a nominator to first do a diligent search for ] sources per ] and ] and then tag for improvement rather than deletion. Stubs or no, he has not yet created an article that was unable to be sourced as notable, despite first glances. If an article can be improved, it should be tagged so, as deletion is only a last resort in a much longer process. The appearance of that process being ignored frustrates him. Please forgive his impatience. ''']''' '']'' 17:29, 24 October 2008 (UTC) | |||
Revision as of 17:29, 24 October 2008
The Roadents
This is not an advertisement and none of my damn articles are advertisements. It also doesn't matter if an article is a stub. I have also added your AFD nomination to the log and fixed it since you did it wrong. Schuym1 (talk) 23:53, 23 October 2008 (UTC)
- Don't you curse towards me young man.. The stub was a bunch of useless information.. It should be deleted! It's not notable enough to deserve a wikipedia entry... Imnotacoolguy (talk) 05:45, 24 October 2008 (UTC)
- Schuym1 may be perhaps suggesting that he feels it is up to a nominator to first do a diligent search for WP:V sources per WP:AFD and WP:ATF and then tag for improvement rather than deletion. Stubs or no, he has not yet created an article that was unable to be sourced as notable, despite first glances. If an article can be improved, it should be tagged so, as deletion is only a last resort in a much longer process. The appearance of that process being ignored frustrates him. Please forgive his impatience. Schmidt, 17:29, 24 October 2008 (UTC)