User talk:137.111.13.34
Template:GSL 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. RL0919 (talk) 14:50, 16 October 2009 (UTC)
An editor has nominated one or more articles which you have created or worked on, for deletion. The nominated article is I-OOA. We appreciate your contributions, but the nominator doesn't believe that the article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion and has explained why in his/her nomination (see also Wikipedia:Notability and "What Wikipedia is not").
Your opinions on whether the article meets inclusion criteria and what should be done with the article are welcome; please participate in the discussion(s) by adding your comments to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/I-OOA. Please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~).
You may also edit the article during the discussion to improve it but should not remove the articles for deletion template from the top of the article; such removal will not end the deletion debate.
Please note: This is an automatic notification by a bot. I have nothing to do with this article or the deletion nomination, and can't do anything about it. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 01:10, 29 March 2010 (UTC)
Speedy deletion nomination of I-OOA[edit]
If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.
You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.
A tag has been placed on I-OOA 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, organization (band, club, company, etc.) or web content, 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.
If you think that this notice was placed here in error, contest the deletion by clicking on the button that looks like this: 
which appears inside of the speedy deletion ({{db-...}}) tag (if no such tag exists, the page is no longer a speedy delete candidate). Doing so will take you to the talk page where you will find a pre-formatted place for you to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. You can also visit the the page's talk page directly to give your reasons, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page 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 page that would render it more in conformance 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. Walter Görlitz (talk) 13:53, 21 April 2011 (UTC)
The article Prisoners' rights has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:
- This article doesn't offer any information. It alludes vaguely to a "movement for prisoner rights" and "advocates", a list of articles, but little else. This subject is already well covered under articles such as Prison reform, Penal Reform International, and associated prison articles.
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. JeffJ (talk) 23:44, 18 October 2011 (UTC)
The article G&R Gmail has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:
- Notability has not been demonstrated.
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. Cybercobra (talk) 07:07, 30 January 2012 (UTC)
The article Le Lisp has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:
- no references, notability not established
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. Yworo (talk) 18:42, 14 March 2012 (UTC)
Proposed deletion of Object-oriented SQL[edit]
The article Object-oriented SQL has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:
- Unreferenced since 2009, no evidence of notability
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. — Keφr 09:11, 16 August 2014 (UTC)
Nomination of Object-oriented SQL for deletion[edit]
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Object-oriented SQL 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/Object-oriented SQL 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. — Keφr 14:06, 23 August 2014 (UTC)
Proposed deletion of I-OOA[edit]
The article I-OOA has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:
- No sign of this meeting WP:NSOFT.
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. QVVERTYVS (hm?) 17:48, 2 February 2015 (UTC)
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article I-OOA 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/I-OOA (2nd nomination) 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. QVVERTYVS (hm?) 17:55, 2 February 2015 (UTC)
Proposed deletion of ObjVlisp[edit]
The article ObjVlisp has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:
- No significance or importance claimed. No genuine notability.
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. H.dryad (talk) 19:42, 18 March 2016 (UTC)
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Le Lisp 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/Le Lisp 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. H.dryad (talk) 19:44, 18 March 2016 (UTC)
Proposed deletion of IBM OD390[edit]
The article IBM OD390 has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:
- While I believe this is or was a real IBM product, I can find almost no information anywhere on it. There are some passing references on the IBM website, but not enough to determine much more than its existence; it has either been discontinued or renamed. (Possibly, it has been renamed to "IBM Content Manager OnDemand for z/OS and OS/390", but I can't confirm that.)
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. SJK (talk) 10:10, 15 April 2016 (UTC)
Paraconsistent mathematics moved to draftspace[edit]
An article you recently created, Paraconsistent mathematics, does not have enough sources and citations as written to remain published. It needs more citations from reliable, independent sources. (?) Information that can't be referenced should be removed (verifiability is of central importance on Wikipedia). I've moved your draft to draftspace (with a prefix of "Draft:" before the article title) where you can incubate the article with minimal disruption. When you feel the article meets Wikipedia's general notability guideline and thus is ready for mainspace, please follow the confirms on the Articles for Creation template atop the page. Polyamorph (talk) 17:50, 23 June 2018 (UTC)
The article Object-code Buffer Overrun Evaluator has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:
Does not appear to meet NSOFT, NPRODUCT, or GNG due to a lack of evidence, cited or brought up through source searches, of widespread use, use of innovative techniques or impact on the industry.
While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages 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 page 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. SITH (talk) 11:43, 12 March 2019 (UTC)
"Visual editor" listed at Redirects for discussion[edit]
A discussion is taking place to address the redirect Visual editor. The discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2021 February 2#Visual editor until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. Tea2min (talk) 11:35, 2 February 2021 (UTC)
The article Object Value has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:
I wasn't able to find sufficient sourcing to indicate that "object value" is a truly notable term of art in industrial design, as opposed to just being a two-word phrase. Insufficient sourcing available to port it to Wiktionary.
While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages 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 page 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. ♠PMC♠ (talk) 02:54, 22 March 2021 (UTC)
The article Non-classical analysis has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:
As has been noted previously on Talk:Non-classical analysis#OR?, there does not seem to be a unified concept of non-classical analysis in the literature at all. As a concept, I believe this fails WP:GNG.
While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages 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 page 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. Felix QW (talk) 14:59, 9 January 2022 (UTC)
Nomination of Non-classical analysis for deletion[edit]
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Non-classical analysis 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.
–LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 01:14, 12 January 2022 (UTC)
Nomination of Interpolation (popular music) for deletion[edit]
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Interpolation (popular music) 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 until the discussion has finished.
Acousmana 15:55, 3 August 2022 (UTC)
The article ObjectCenter has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:
Non-notable IDE from a non-notable company that's already had two of its articles deleted.
While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages 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 page 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. ℰmi1y⧼T·C⧽ 03:32, 13 January 2023 (UTC)
 | This is the discussion page for an IP user, identified by the user's IP address. Many IP addresses change periodically, and are often shared by several users. If you are an IP user, you may create an account or log in to avoid future confusion with other IP users. Registering also hides your IP address. |