User talk:LanternLight

Welcome

Welcome!

Hello, LanternLight, 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:

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! Sephiroth storm (talk) 16:44, 2 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

1974-75 Kentucky Colonels season

Thank you for creating 1974-75 Kentucky Colonels season. Keep up the good work, Kingturtle (talk) 12:26, 30 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Earl Foreman

Hi! I'm a member of Wikipedia:WikiProject New page. I read your articl on Earl Foreman. There was a obvious omission in the article that I thought would be best to figure out while the article is new and you the creator is still around. Is Earl Foreman alive or dead? And if you know would you mind including that information in the article? Thanks.Ltwin (talk) 20:13, 4 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know the answer to that offhand . . . but I'd be curious to know myself!

Speedy deletion of John Goodner

A tag has been placed on John Goodner requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about a person or group of people, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable, as well as our subject-specific notability guideline for biographies.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the article meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the article does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that they userfy the article or have a copy emailed to you. Cheers, Mazeau (talk) 03:19, 3 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Deletion

Hello. Just wanted to let you know that I nominated three articles that you worked on for deletion. The discussion for Ron Hudson, Mike Major, and John Goodner is at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ron Hudson. I also wanted to let you know about Ventrell Jenkins, which was deleted because it was about an athlete, but didn't indicate why he was notable. – wodup – 04:17, 5 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Page moves

Hi there. For future reference, please don't move pages by copying and pasting, as you did with Bill Garner. Rather, use the move tab at the top of the page, as it preserves the article's edit history. Thanks. SteveO (talk) 19:35, 12 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

CfD nomination of Category:Great Lakes Bowl

I have nominated Category:Great Lakes Bowl (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs) for deletion. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at the discussion page. Thank you. Bradjamesbrown (talk) 07:34, 3 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

1975–76 Buffalo Braves season

You added a lot of unsourced content to the 1975–76 Buffalo Braves season article about exhibition games. If you are able to add sources to this information, that would be helpful. Otherwise, it may be removed.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 15:13, 20 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

It is sourced.

You are now a Reviewer

Hello. Your account has been granted the "reviewer" userright, allowing you to review other users' edits on certain flagged pages. Pending changes, also known as flagged protection, is currently undergoing a two-month trial scheduled to end 15 August 2010.

Reviewers can review edits made by users who are not autoconfirmed to articles placed under pending changes. Pending changes is applied to only a small number of articles, similarly to how semi-protection is applied but in a more controlled way for the trial. The list of articles with pending changes awaiting review is located at Special:OldReviewedPages.

For the guideline on reviewing, see Wikipedia:Reviewing. Being granted reviewer rights doesn't change how you can edit articles even with pending changes. The general help page on pending changes can be found here, and the general policy for the trial can be found here.

If you do not want this userright, you may ask any administrator to remove it for you at any time. —DoRD (talk) 02:21, 28 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Categories for discussion nomination of Category:ABA 2000

Category:ABA 2000, which you created, has been nominated for deletion, merging, or renaming. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the Categories for discussion page. Thank you.--Mike Selinker (talk) 12:44, 1 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Elizabeth Eagleton Weigand for deletion

The article Elizabeth Eagleton Weigand is being discussed concerning whether it is suitable for inclusion as an article according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Elizabeth Eagleton Weigand 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 good 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 template from the top of the article. JN 466 12:23, 20 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Stephen Poludniak for deletion

The article Stephen Poludniak is being discussed concerning whether it is suitable for inclusion as an article according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Stephen Poludniak 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 good 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 template from the top of the article. JN 466 15:24, 4 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Autopatrolled

Hello, this is just to let you know that I have granted you the "autopatrolled" permission. This won't affect your editing, it just automatically marks any page you create as patrolled, benefiting new page patrollers. Please remember:

This permission does not give you any special status or authority
Submission of inappropriate material may lead to its removal
You may wish to display the {{Autopatrolled}} top icon and/or the {{User wikipedia/autopatrolled}} userbox on your user page
If, for any reason, you decide you do not want the permission, let me know and I can remove it

If you have any questions about the permission, don't hesitate to ask. Otherwise, happy editing! Acalamari 21:27, 24 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Morgan Newton

The article Morgan Newton has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Fails WP:BIO as a back-up quarterback

While all 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. TM 03:26, 10 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Felon vs. Ex-Felon

Hi there LanternLight,

I notice you've been systematically replacing "ex-felon" with "felon" on the English Wikipedia here. I can guess at your rationale, but I don't feel it's the best decision. "Ex-felon" is a common usage (example, example), and also provides relevant information (is the person currently incarcerated, or are they now at liberty, having 'served their time'?) Given that "felon" also has connotations of "evil, bad, immoral," I feel that this is sort of a judgmental term. I particularly don't think it's warranted to make all these replacements. Can you tell me a little more about why you're making these changes? Thanks! Groupuscule (talk) 18:07, 17 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, thanks for your response. I appreciate that you feel that "felon" is more accurate. I do think it has negative connotations, as seen above, and that 'ex-felon' conveys more information. (Differentiates between someone currently incarcerated and someone now at liberty). Given that "ex-felon" is standard usage (many webcrawler hits), it seems like bad policy to change. I don't want to go through and revert your edits, but I think this is a really important issue, due in large part to the stigma that ex-felons face in society. I would ask if perhaps you could hold off on changing more instances of "ex-felon," and maybe we can ask for some mediation if you still feel strongly about the other changes? Thanks, and thanks for all your edits. groupuscule (talk) 14:11, 19 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Oh My My (Ringo Starr song)

Concerning your contribution, Oh My My (Ringo Starr song), a page move cannot be done by simply copying and pasting the contents of a page into a new location, as such a process does not transfer the page's edit history and therefore violates the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike (CC-BY-SA) license by denying attribution to editors who worked on Oh My My. This article or image appears to be a direct copy from Oh My My. As a violation of the page move process, Oh My My (Ringo Starr song) needs to be temporarily deleted under the speedy deletion criteria so that Oh My My may be properly moved in a way that will preserve its edit history. Oh My My (Ringo Starr song) has been tagged for deletion, and may have been deleted by the time you see this message. If not, please refrain from editing either Oh My My or Oh My My (Ringo Starr song) until the latter has been deleted according to Wikipedia's speedy criterion G6 (non-controversial housekeeping).

If you think that the page was nominated in error, contest the nomination by visiting the page's talk page directly to give your reasons, but be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but do not hesitate to add information that is consistent with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, you can contact one of these administrators to request that the administrator userfy the page or email a copy to you. — Mr. Stradivarius ^{(have a chat)} 03:15, 27 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

That's fine. Sounds like the best way to set it up. Thanks.

Ways to improve Mikhail Alexandrovich Kedrov

Hi, I'm MrNiceGuy1113. LanternLight, thanks for creating Mikhail Alexandrovich Kedrov!

I've just tagged the page, using our page curation tools, as having some issues to fix. Hi there, I have just added a "copyedit" tag to your article. Reason being that the name "Kedrov" is repeated too often--when writing in English always avoid reption. Kedrov this, Kedrov that, Kedrov the other becomes very annoying, fast.Kind Regard

The tags can be removed by you or another editor once the issues they mention are addressed. If you have questions, you can leave a comment on my talk page. Or, for more editing help, talk to the volunteers at the Teahouse.

Disambiguation link notification for January 2

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Mikhail Alexandrovich Kedrov, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page White Russian (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:11, 2 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Postcrossing

Postcrossing changes every day. So it makes no sense to keep it actual every day. Once a month will be ok. And when changed anything, please line it with date in the references...--Starpromi (talk) 00:27, 16 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Why just once a month, instead of more recent and up to date information? How does less recent information better serve anyone?

Nomination of Morgan Newton for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Morgan Newton 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/Morgan Newton 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. Gtwfan52 (talk) 18:32, 20 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

== Merge Proposal of Daniel Silna into Ozzie Silna

Merge discussion for Daniel Silna

An article that you have been involved in editing, Daniel Silna, has been proposed for a merge with another article. If you are interested in the merge discussion, please participate by going here, and adding your comments on the discussion page. Thank you. Natg 19 (talk) 19:00, 13 November 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) 13:40, 23 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Dick Vermillion for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Dick Vermillion 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/Dick Vermillion 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. Clarityfiend (talk) 08:20, 10 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Washington Generals has been nominated for merging

Category:Washington Generals has been nominated for merging. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. User:Namiba 14:54, 10 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Rick Smith (American football, born 1948)

The article Rick Smith (American football, born 1948) has been proposed for deletion because it appears to have no references. Under Wikipedia policy, this biography of a living person will be deleted after seven days unless it has at least one reference to a reliable source that directly supports material in the article.

If you created the article, please don't be offended. Instead, consider improving the article. For help on inserting references, see Referencing for beginners, or ask at the help desk. Once you have provided at least one reliable source, you may remove the {{prod blp/dated}} tag. Please do not remove the tag unless the article is sourced. If you cannot provide such a source within seven days, the article may be deleted, but you can request that it be undeleted when you are ready to add one. jlwoodwa (talk) 22:44, 21 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]