User talk:Bartolomeorastrelli

Welcome!

Hello, Bartolomeorastrelli, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Unfortunately, one or more of the pages you created, such as Dasho, may not conform to some of Wikipedia's guidelines, and may soon be deleted.

There's a page about creating articles you may want to read called Your first article. If you are stuck, and looking for help, please come to the New contributors' help page, where experienced Wikipedians can answer any queries you have! Or, you can just type {{helpme}} on this page, and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Here are a few other good links for newcomers:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you have any questions, check out Wikipedia:Questions or ask me on my talk page. Again, welcome! Triwbe (talk) 08:21, 20 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Dasho[edit]

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

Wikipedia is not a dictionary

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. The speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Triwbe (talk) 08:21, 20 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Dasho for deletion[edit]

A discussion has begun about whether the article Dasho, which you created or to which you contributed, should be deleted. While contributions are welcome, an article may be deleted if it is inconsistent with Wikipedia policies and guidelines for inclusion, explained in the deletion policy.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Dasho until a consensus is reached, and you are welcome to contribute to the discussion.

You may edit the article during the discussion, including to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion template from the top of the article. Triwbe (talk) 21:43, 22 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Ed Lyon[edit]

Hello Bartolomeorastrelli,

I wanted to let you know that I just tagged Ed Lyon for deletion, because the article doesn't clearly say why the subject is important enough to be included in an encyclopedia.

If you feel that the article shouldn't be deleted and want more time to work on it, you can contest this deletion, but please don't remove the speedy deletion tag from the top.

You can leave a note on my talk page if you have questions. Aaekia (talk) 17:54, 22 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Response to your "Contralti" posting on my talk page[edit]

Thanks for your note. As a 9-year "veteran" of WP, please allow me to explain a few things, and then suggest that you read the discussion which appeared on the WP:OPERA page.

Each major subject area has its Project. Anyone can join any Project. Basically, those editors who are members of WP:OPERA are those who regularly write about opera. Our unofficial leader is User:Voceditenore. Now, within the Project, guidelines have been established as to the basic elements which should appear in every opera article in order that there be consistency. Guidelines have been proposed, discussed and consensus reached; this takes place on the Project Talk page as you will see below.

Therefore, the fundamental principle under which all Projects work and by which all WP editing is done is by consensus. A lone editor or several editors challenging an article's content or format typically seek support from others on the Project talk page. Arguments are put forward and consensus reached. Then action is taken.

In the case of the long lists of singers attached to the various voice type articles, the consensus was to remove them for the reasons which you can read below. Here's how the consensus was established, after which I took action:

Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Opera#Problems with voice type articles and a potential solution

I hope that this is a satisfactory explanation, even though you may not agree with it. Viva-Verdi (talk) 21:48, 22 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Re: "unofficial leader". Well, someone probably needs to take the initiative in certain areas such as proposing titles for "Opera of the Month", etc., although anyone can do it. Some people are more active at the Project level than others, so discussions will often be started by this person and, when an update appears on peoples' "Watch lists", responses are generated as happened in this case. However, as often happens, a project member initiates a discussion, so there is no formal system beyond -again- seeking consensus. Viva-Verdi (talk) 22:15, 23 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Deletion of Lyon[edit]

Hello,

I cannot remember the specific page. I tagged it for notability- that is, I believed that the article was about someone who was not notable enough for a Wikipedia article. I cannot give you more details because I encounter too many to recall all of them.

I did not, however, actually delete the article- I just tagged it. An administrator then agreed with my judgement and deleted it.

Aaekia (talk) 21:00, 23 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I've submitted a refund request and left a comment on the admin's talk page. If the page is restored I'll fix up the refs for notability.-- Aronzak (talk) 04:51, 24 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @Bartolomeorastrelli:, the article Ed Lyon has been restored. You used too many primary sources, particularly self-published sources like the tenor's website, which are not appropriate for Wikipedia, which uses verifiable information from reliable, secondary sources. Over-reliance on self-published sources makes the article look like advertising or paid promotion, which is why the article was deleted. I've taken out self-published links, and the link to the tenor's twitter page (which is self-published). Please read up on policies for biographies, because there are greater rules on things like unsourced or poorly sourced information, which aim to prevent defamation. If you have any issues, please ask me. Thanks. -- Aronzak (talk) 17:31, 24 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]