User talk:C.Fred
C.Fred is taking a short wikibreak and will be back on Wikipedia soon. |
1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10 |
This page has archives. Sections older than 7 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III. |
Welcome to my talk page!
|
Deletion of Article
I had created an artile under Bioteknika. It was deleted. Is there any updates that are required?? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kuber.ksp (talk • contribs) 06:06, 23 September 2011 (UTC)
Article "Sculpture Natalia Shapiro"
Hi, If you deleted my article, could you please remove it completely, I do not won it like this - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Natalia_Shapira on the Google search Thank you VERY VERY much Regards Svetlana Ivanova. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.229.215.223 (talk) 12:28, 23 September 2011 (UTC)
- That's the way it looks when an article was created and is deleted. If I "removed it completely", the only thing that would disappear is the log of the deletion—and that log needs to stay in place. —C.Fred (talk) 20:06, 27 September 2011 (UTC)
- (talk page stalker) I think that the problem that Ivanova is pointing to is that the article still shows up on Google Search. Unfortunately, there is nothing we can do about that, because Google is a wholly separate organization that we have no control over. Often, Wikipedia articles get copied by other sites, including Google, before we have a chance to edit or delete them, and thus can remain on the web indefinitely. However, over time, those copied pages often fall in Google's ratings, because they become stale and are replaced with more up-to-date information. Qwyrxian (talk) 02:01, 28 September 2011 (UTC)
A barnstar for you!
The Anti-Vandalism Barnstar | |
Thank you for removing the obnoxious racist edits to the Holly Springs page! Allthingstoallpeople (talk) 03:38, 27 September 2011 (UTC) |
Occupy Wall Street
I accidentally reverted your edit. Your change was promptly adopted. Thank you. --Fayerman (talk) 05:05, 1 October 2011 (UTC)
Evan Feinberg
Although obviously this unsourced article would not stand as it is , it clearly asserted importance. Please restore, and perhaps there will be sources available, though even then it might not pass AfD. (I know I have the ability to do so myself, but I want to ask you first.) Incidentally, the ed. who placed the tag has placed a good many incorrect speedies, as judged by a number of admins, and I'd suggest checking his tagging quite carefully DGG ( talk ) 03:48, 6 October 2011 (UTC)
A highly biased article needs equilibrium
Fred, Prior to making 'undos' it is requested that you visit the polarized, biased information formerly on this article and question your ethics as a CPA if the article was not, in fact, biased before. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Pharmameatsdorkies (talk • contribs) 02:23, 11 October 2011 (UTC)
- Pardon my butting in, but you'll want to discuss this on the article's talk page, Pharma. - SummerPhD (talk) 02:47, 11 October 2011 (UTC)
Their wedding was verified by Associated Press, that was the "AP" reports. Just google it and you will see. Their people verified as India Times and others were just putting something to sell papers. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mamajoe777 (talk • contribs) 22:31, 13 October 2011 (UTC)
Deletion notice re: International Society for the Study of Medievalism
Dear Fred,
I will add more information on the Society soon. The Society's work is notable and worthy of inclusion on Wikipedia because the various other projects/pages it is connected to (Studies in Medievalism, Medievally Speaking, etc.) all happen under the umbrella of the organization. If it is the list of names that is problematic, I can certainly take those off and simply put a link to the Society pages soon to go up on the Studies in Medievalism website. Thanks for any help you can give me. Best, r