User talk:Ashmodai

Please post new messages to the bottom of my talk page. Please use headlines when starting new talk topics. Thank you.

Hello. I notice that you added {{Reenactment-stub}} to the stub types page. Note that the top of the page states:

"To avoid unnecessary redirects and reverts, please discuss all new stubs at Wikipedia:WikiProject Stub sorting/Criteria prior to creation of new stubs and placement in articles or tables."

I have therefore moved the entry to the relevant location, here. Please feel free to discuss it there.

--TheParanoidOne 15:52, 21 Jun 2005 (UTC)

cleanup tag

I see you have added a cleanup template to Vergangenheitsbewältigung. Not that that's necessarily objectionable, but it would be helpful if you would do more than make a passing comment to this edit and elaborate on this in the article's discussion page. Buffyg 19:29, 23 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your response on my talk page. It is always more helpful in the cleanup of an article to have more extensive feedback than it is to deal with a general contention that an article needs improvement. I have made this mistake before. It generally contributes to the cleanup tag being removed without any cleanup. Thank you for taking the time on the talk page. I can assure you that it is appreciated. Buffyg 22:41, 23 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Necromancing

I was reading over the images for deletion page and noticed your comments regarding Necromancing. I was planning on putting Necromancing on the requests for comment page, seeing as that user has been notified (by different people) regarding his apparent disregard for the image tagging policies. I am wondering if you would support such an endeavor, or if you have any other suggestions as to how to get this user to recognize and accept the applicable image policies. Thanks! -- Joe Beaudoin Jr. ^{Think out loud} 03:03, 28 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

So far most of his contributions seem to consist of unlisted VfDs and untagged images (most, if not all, of which seem to be copyrighted). Of course I support it. Ashmodai 05:07, 28 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, I've put up a page regarding Necromancing on RfC: Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Necromancing -- Joe Beaudoin Jr. ^{Think out loud} 03:02, 29 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Important VFD

Please see the VFD for commons:List of victims of the 1913 Great Lakes storm. This is of vital importance. This list and others like it are being pushed off of the entire Wikimedia project. It started at Wikipedia, where they were VFDd in favor of moving to Wikisource/Commons. Now they are being VFDd off Wikisource (they don't really belong there, since they are not original source texts), with people there saying they should be on WP/Commons, and it is also being VFDd on Commons, where people don't realize that Commons accepts texts (says so right on the Main Page). This will set a precedent for any user-created lists. -- BRIAN0918 22:25, 30 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia is not a memorial [1] Ojw 23:40, 30 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Indeed. Apart from that, I am neither a Commons regular nor do I know anything about the 1913 Great Lakes storm, so I see no way I could legitimately vote on that. Ashmodai 10:18, 31 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Featured article for December 25th

I noticed you have listed yourself in Category:Atheist Wikipedians. That said, you will probably be interested in my suggested featured article for December 25th: Omnipotence paradox. The other suggestion being supported by others for that date is Christmas, although Raul654 has historically been against featuring articles on the same day as their anniversary/holiday. — BRIAN0918 • 2005-11-28 08:06

Proposal on Notability

Because you're a member of the Association of Inclusionist Wikipedians, I'm notifying you that the inclusionist proposa Wikipedia:Non-notabilityl is in progress to define the role of notability in articles. Please help us make this successful! Also note the proposal Wikipedia:Importance is a deletionist proposla that seeks to officially introduce notabiltiy for the first time. --Ephilei 04:45, 4 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Twelve Monkeys

Hi Ashmodai, is the text a word to word copy, or has it been rephrased? I tried to find obvious copied sections, but didn't. It would help if you point out the part. I will send an administrator for a check via film project later today. Thanks for checking. Hoverfish 08:59, 19 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, you mean the sections you already deleted? Yes, they look copied/rearranged, but since you deleted them it's not clear what the copyvio is refering to. I will notify the admin to check in edit history. Hoverfish 09:18, 19 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Discordian code

Hey, Brother, what's the deal with you're Discordian code? I've never seen it before. Is it strictly a mindfuck, or is there a precedent for it? B.Mearns ^*, KSC 17:41, 1 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The precept for this ~~bible~~ code is preordained from the ancient Geeks. —WurmWoode^T 06:41, 25 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hello!

Just thought I'd say hi (^_-)

PolarWolf has smiled at you! Smiles promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by smiling at someone else, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Happy editing!
Smile at others by adding {{subst:Smile}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

Safia Aoude

In order to defeat the "deletionists" would you be prepared to keep Safia Aoude's article?Phase4 10:41, 9 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of East Anglia Medieval Fayre

A proposed deletion template has been added to the article East Anglia Medieval Fayre, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process because of the following concern:

A search for references failed to find significant coverage in reliable sources to comply with notability requirements. This included web searches for news coverage, books, and journals, which can be seen from the following links:

East Anglia Medieval Fayre – news, books, scholar Consequently, this article is about a subject that appears to lack sufficient notability.

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. Abductive (talk) 14:32, 4 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination for deletion of Template:Reenactment alliance

Template:Reenactment alliance has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Thank you. — This, that, and the other (talk) 06:43, 15 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Early Medieval Alliance

The article Early Medieval Alliance has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

The official site is dead which was the only source used in the article. Notability was never established for the organization which might now be defunct anyway. A general internet search using Google didn't provide anything significant and Google News had nothing. Given that the organization appears to have been an umbrella group with many members it seems like it might have been notable but I have been unable to verify any of these claims to establish that it was ever notable.

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. SQGibbon (talk) 16:57, 18 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Early Medieval Alliance for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Early Medieval Alliance 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/Early Medieval Alliance 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. SQGibbon (talk) 17:00, 18 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom elections are now open!

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability 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, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:17, 30 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of East Anglia Medieval Fayre for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article East Anglia Medieval Fayre 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/East Anglia Medieval Fayre 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. Cardiffbear88 (talk) 23:01, 17 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]