User talk:Legaleagle86: Difference between revisions

Archives
1 | 2 | 3 | 4

DYK nomination of Saradha Group financial scandal

Hello! Your submission of Saradha Group financial scandal at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! SusanLesch (talk) 00:38, 5 May 2013 (UTC)

DYK nomination of Saradha Group financial scandal

Hello! Your submission of Saradha Group financial scandal at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! SusanLesch (talk) 14:52, 5 May 2013 (UTC)

DYK nomination of Saradha Group financial scandal

Hello! Your submission of Saradha Group financial scandal at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! SusanLesch (talk) 19:32, 5 May 2013 (UTC)

DYK for Saradha Group financial scandal

Casliber (talk · contribs) 00:02, 9 May 2013 (UTC)

Good Article nomination

Do you have plans to nominate Saradha Group financial scandal‎ for a good article. I am impressed by your work. Solomon7968 (talk) 10:40, 10 May 2013 (UTC)

There are still some minor problems with copyedit - like tenses, different styles. once the article has some uniformity we can nominate it for GA. Can you try and look into the issue of copyedit or post the article in the copyeditors forum.LegalEagle (talk) 11:10, 10 May 2013 (UTC)

Well I am now involved in a project to make articles about notable alumni of Indian Statistical Institute. And I am not well experienced in copy edit works. But I can suggest you some improvements.

• I will try to make an separate article of Kanwar Deep Singh who is a TMC MP and a owner of Chit fund Alchemist.
• Add links of involvement of Mithun Chakraborty to saradha Group.
• Add links of involvement of Subhaprasanna to saradha Group.
• Add links of involvement of Rice Group headed by Amitava Nandy to saradha Group.This seems to me serious faults of the article. Finding sources of last two are pretty easy. Again I will give my feedback time to time reviewing the article. Solomon7968 (talk) 11:20, 10 May 2013 (UTC)

DSNLU Visakhapatnam- regarding

Hi! May I please know, why u always keep on removing DSNLU from the list of national law universities? Is the University Grants Commission fooling people when it says that it is a national law university? Even the Bar Council of India is doing the same when it says, DSNLU is recognized by it... I'd like to know,considering which reliable source, you keep on doing such Illogical act? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 122.168.229.146 (talk) 16:26, 12 June 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for pointing out, after the sources were provided I refrained from reverting the data posted by you. LegalEagle (talk) 17:42, 12 June 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for August 26

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Research and Analysis Wing, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages John Abraham and Kabir Khan (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) 11:29, 26 August 2013 (UTC)

R&AW - Rank / Hierarchy

Hi,

Your contributions to the subject in discussion are valuable.

However, the rank structure provided needs to be revised. R&AW unlike IB does not follow the Directorial ranking system. It follows the Ministry of Ext Affairs designations. Under Secretary, Dy. Secretary, Director (only Inclusion),Joint Secretary, Addl. Secretary,Spl. Secretary, Secretary (R). — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ns22687 (talk • contribs) 07:20, 27 August 2013 (UTC)

Yes, you are right, after the Emergency the directorial designation was changed to secretarial one, will make appropriate housekeeping changes. If you have time try to find out a bit more about the directors and add to their career history at the collapsible table. LegalEagle (talk) 11:36, 1 September 2013 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (File:Virappan leading his group in moily forest.jpg)

Thanks for uploading File:Virappan leading his group in moily forest.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'file' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Werieth (talk) 17:11, 8 September 2013 (UTC)

hi

sir,i wish to talk to you,my id is raghav.gakhar2010@gmail.com — Preceding unsigned comment added by 106.207.45.25 (talk) 00:01, 24 September 2013 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Saradha Group financial scandal

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Saradha Group financial scandal you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Khazar2 -- Khazar2 (talk) 12:02, 6 October 2013 (UTC)

Just wanted to ping you again to remind you of this review. I'll look forward to your thoughts! Thanks, -- Khazar2 (talk) 12:36, 10 October 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for the comments, I would update the article accordingly in a couple of days.LegalEagle (talk) 16:26, 10 October 2013 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Saradha Group financial scandal

The article Saradha Group financial scandal you nominated as a good article has failed ; see Talk:Saradha Group financial scandal for reasons why the nomination failed. If or when these points have been taken care of, you may apply for a new nomination of the article. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Khazar2 -- Khazar2 (talk) 15:22, 15 October 2013 (UTC)

Possibly unfree File:NetajiDEATHCERTIFICATE.JPG

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:NetajiDEATHCERTIFICATE.JPG, has been listed at Wikipedia:Possibly unfree files because its copyright status is unclear or disputed. If the file's copyright status cannot be verified, it may be deleted. You may find more information on the file description page. You are welcome to add comments to its entry at the discussion if you object to the listing for any reason. Thank you. -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 13:05, 8 November 2013 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of File:NetajiDEATHCERTIFICATE.JPG

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 File:NetajiDEATHCERTIFICATE.JPG requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G12 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article or image appears to be a clear copyright infringement. This article or image appears to be a direct copy from the fair use claim fails, simple text can easily convey what is in text on the document. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material, and as a consequence, your addition will most likely be deleted. You may use external websites as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. This part is crucial: say it in your own words. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing.

If the external website or image belongs to you, and you want to allow Wikipedia to use the text or image — which means allowing other people to modify it — then you must verify that externally by one of the processes explained at Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials. If you are not the owner of the external website or image but have permission from that owner, see Wikipedia:Requesting copyright permission. You might want to look at Wikipedia's policies and guidelines for more details, or ask a question here.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, 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 from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 14:05, 8 November 2013 (UTC)

Autonomous law schools in India

I am planning to go for a second requested move from Autonomous law schools in India to National law universities. Please share your views before I go for a formal request. Amartyabag ^TALK2ME 11:18, 14 February 2014 (UTC)

Autonomous law schools seem to be more wider than say National law universities, the law schools would also include private law schools and some govt funded stand alone law colleges. I would say that if you think that there is a need for an umbrella article on national law universities, you should start a new article which may have some commonalities with the autonomous article. Do share what you think. LegalEagle (talk) 19:20, 14 February 2014 (UTC)

Notification of automated file description generation

Your upload of File:Bookshelves, campus library, West Bengal National University of Juridical Sciences.jpg or contribution to its description is noted, and thanks (even if belatedly) for your contribution. In order to help make better use of the media, an attempt has been made by an automated process to identify and add certain information to the media's description page.

This notification is placed on your talk page because a bot has identified you either as the uploader of the file, or as a contributor to its metadata. It would be appreciated if you could carefully review the information the bot added. To opt out of these notifications, please follow the instructions here. Thanks! Message delivered by Theo's Little Bot (opt-out) 14:01, 18 February 2014 (UTC)

• Another one of your uploads, File:Campus-hostels.jpg, has also had some information automatically added. If you get a moment, please review the bot's contributions there as well. Thanks! Message delivered by Theo's Little Bot (opt-out) 14:56, 11 March 2014 (UTC)

• Another one of your uploads, File:Cocked123.jpg, has also had some information automatically added. If you get a moment, please review the bot's contributions there as well. Thanks! Message delivered by Theo's Little Bot (opt-out) 14:58, 15 May 2014 (UTC)

File:Uban Dal.jpg

Dear uploader: The media file you uploaded as File:Uban Dal.jpg has been listed for speedy deletion because you selected a copyright license type implying some type of restricted use, such as for non-commercial use only, or for educational use only or for use on Wikipedia by permission. While it might seem reasonable to assume that such files can be freely used on Wikipedia, this is in fact not the case[1][2]. Please do not upload any more files with these restrictions on them, because images on Wikipedia need to be compatible with the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike or another free license, which allow anyone to use it for any purpose, commercial or non-commercial. See our non-free content guidelines for more information.

If you created this media file and want to use it on Wikipedia, you may re-upload it (or amend the image description if it has not yet been deleted) and use the license {{cc-by-sa-3.0}} to license it under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 license, or use {{PD-self}} to release it into the public domain. Note, if you did create this file, you may want to upload it to Wikimedia Commons, which will allow the image to be accessed by all Wikimedia Foundation projects (which include the various localized versions of Wikipedia)

If you did not create this media file, please understand that the vast majority of images found on the internet are not appropriate for Wikipedia. Most content on the internet is copyrighted and the creator of the image has exclusive rights to use it. Wikipedia respects the copyrights of others - do not upload images that violate others' copyrights. In certain limited cases, we may be able to use an image under a claim of fair use - if you are certain that fair use would apply here, you may choose one of the fair use tags from this list. If no fair use rationale applies, you may want to contact the copyright holder and request that they make the media available under a free license.

If you have any questions please ask at Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. Thank you. Rédacteur Tibet (talk) 19:42, 3 April 2014 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for August 8

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Research and Analysis Wing, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page WMD. 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) 09:24, 8 August 2014 (UTC)

Your recent edits on Kailash Satyarthi

Hi Legaleagle86, I'm another editor at WikiProject India and I'd like to thank you for your efforts to improve the referencing of Kailash Satyarthi. A word of advice, though. Now with 3000 plus edits, you are no longer considered to be a novice editor and it is expected that your edits will be only beneficial to Wikipedia. Unfortunately, your adding bare-bones urls as references to such an important article is not a good editting practice.

You need to use templated web citations for these. FYI, I'm giving you the shortcut wikitext of these to aid you to copy & paste..

• <ref name="">{{cite book |title= |last= |first= |authorlink= |coauthors= |year= |publisher= |location= |isbn= |page= |pages= |url= |accessdate=10 October 2014}}</ref>
• <ref name="">{{cite web |url= |title= |author= |date= |work= |publisher= |accessdate=10 October 2014}}</ref>
• <ref name="">{{cite journal |last1= |first1= |last2= |first2= |year= |title= |journal= |publisher= |volume= |issue= |pages= |url= |doi= |accessdate=10 October 2014}}</ref>
• <ref name="">{{cite news |title= |author= |url= |newspaper= |date= |accessdate=10 October 2014}}</ref>

You can get more info from Template:Cite web, Template:Cite journal, Template:Cite book, Template:Cite news.

So I request you to please format the references you added to the article. In this way, the article will improve even more, you would have learnt something new & you would not be adding work for others to clean up later.

Best wishes & Happy editting, AshLin (talk) 11:25, 10 October 2014 (UTC)

Thanks, BTW would it be possible to review Saradha Group financial scandal, I want to nominate it again for GA (failed the first time), a third party review from you before nomination would be great, given that you have shepherded articles to GA before. Legaleagle86 (talk) 13:14, 10 October 2014 (UTC)

It's better if you get the final review done by someone else. I'm happy to do a peer review of that for you. But I advise against putting up running articles with breaking news for GA. You should wait till the scandal is done. AshLin (talk) 18:17, 10 October 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for responding. I thought the same thing (about breaking news being unfit for GA) last October (and it was one of the reasons for failure of GA nomination), but as you know law cases take a very long time to come to a conclusion. And my take is that the preliminary chargesheet would be filed by end of this year, first convictions in this case may come sometime in 2016-17. Should we be waiting that long and not try for GA? Legaleagle86 (talk) 18:48, 10 October 2014 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Time cover on Glivec 28 May 2001.png

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Time cover on Glivec 28 May 2001.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Stefan2 (talk) 00:25, 5 December 2014 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for December 17

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Research and Analysis Wing, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Kabir Khan. 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) 09:02, 17 December 2014 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of 1632-verse glossary of terminology

Hello Legaleagle86,

I wanted to let you know that I just tagged 1632-verse glossary of terminology 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. Roshan014 (talk) 18:03, 14 April 2015 (UTC)

Peer review and document improvement request

This is a Peer review request to seek broader input to improve page: meta:Help:Form I & Affidavit (Customised for relinquishment of copyright as per 'free cultural work' definition) an option available under (Indian) Copyright act 1957 rules.

Mahitgar (talk) 02:54, 5 August 2015 (UTC)

Possibly unfree File:Blueprint for proposed new academic block, West Bengal National University of Juridical Sciences.jpg

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Blueprint for proposed new academic block, West Bengal National University of Juridical Sciences.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Possibly unfree files because its copyright status is unclear or disputed. If the file's copyright status cannot be verified, it may be deleted. You may find more information on the file description page. You are welcome to add comments to its entry at the discussion if you object to the listing for any reason. Thank you. Kelly ^hi! 13:38, 7 September 2015 (UTC)

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!

Hello, Legaleagle86. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority 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 in the 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)

RC Patrol-related Proposals in the 2016 Community Wishlist Survey

Greetings Recent Changes Patrollers!

This is a one-time-only message to inform you about technical proposals related to Recent Changes Patrol in the 2016 Community Wishlist Survey that I think you may be interested in reviewing and perhaps even voting for:

1. Adjust number of entries and days at Last unpatrolled
2. Editor-focused central editing dashboard
3. "Hide trusted users" checkbox option on watchlists and related/recent changes (RC) pages
4. Real-Time Recent Changes App for Android
5. Shortcut for patrollers to last changes list

Further, there are more than 20 proposals related to Watchlists in general that you may be interested in reviewing. (and over 260 proposals in all, across many aspects of wikis)

Thank you for your consideration. Please note that voting for proposals continues through December 12, 2016.

Note: You received this message because you have transcluded {{User wikipedia/RC Patrol}} (user box) on your user page. Since this message is "one-time-only" there is no opt out for future mailings.

Best regards, Stevietheman — Delivered: 01:10, 8 December 2016 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Founderdirector2.JPG

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Founderdirector2.JPG. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 19:14, 26 May 2017 (UTC)

File:Sanjeev tripathi.png listed for discussion

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Sanjeev tripathi.png, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for discussion. Please see the discussion to see why it has been listed (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry). Feel free to add your opinion on the matter below the nomination.

ATTENTION: This is an automated, bot-generated message. This bot DID NOT nominate any file(s) for deletion; please refer to the page history of each individual file for details. Thanks, FastilyBot (talk) 23:55, 28 July 2017 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion of Template:Terrorist organisations active in India

Template:Terrorist organisations active in India has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Zackmann08 (^{Talk to me}/_{What I been doing}) 02:08, 8 September 2017 (UTC)

Edits on Research and Analysis Wing

Hi Legaleagle86, I noticed you edited Research and Analysis Wing recently. Thank you for your contributions. However, I noted that you had removed the notable officers section in one of your edits. I am not sure if this was the intent or a mistake. If it was an intent I do find a mention/explanation in your comment edits which is helpful. If it was a mistake I understand but please be careful of editing pages in the future since these edits can sometimes not be caught and we might lose some content. I have now re-added this content. Happy editing. Adamgerber80 (talk) 02:59, 15 January 2018 (UTC)

Hi Adamgerber80, I had removed the officers section for couple of reasons - first, how do we decide who are notable, under what metric, is it not POV? most of the officers mentioned in the section were Directors, second, I felt that the section was not in the correct place, if at all we need to have a section without any context it should be towards the end, and finally, if we look at other articles on intelligence agencies they rarely have a section on notable officers. Let me know what you think and then we can decided to keep the section or remove it. Legaleagle86 (talk) 10:12, 16 January 2018 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of The 1632 Slushpile

The article The 1632 Slushpile has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

trivial commentary attributed entirely to primary sources, which can be covered entirely in summary in the parent article

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. Chris Cunningham (user:thumperward) (talk) 18:17, 6 January 2020 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of File:Legalaiddrama.jpg

The file File:Legalaiddrama.jpg has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

orphaned image, no encyclopedic use

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 files}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the file's talk page.

Please consider addressing the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated files}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and files for discussion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion.

This bot DID NOT nominate any file(s) for deletion; please refer to the page history of each individual file for details. Thanks, FastilyBot (talk) 01:02, 4 April 2020 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of 1637: The Polish Maelstrom

The article 1637: The Polish Maelstrom has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

No indication that subject meets WP:NBOOK. I have been unable to find any published reviews.

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. Jmertel23 (talk) 01:50, 15 February 2021 (UTC)

Nomination of Radio Research Centre for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Radio Research Centre 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/Radio Research Centre 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.

Rusf10 (talk) 23:39, 23 April 2021 (UTC)

File:WinningTeamnujsstet.jpg listed for discussion

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:WinningTeamnujsstet.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for discussion. Please see the discussion to see why it has been listed (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry). Feel free to add your opinion on the matter below the nomination. Thank you. Ixfd64 (talk) 00:58, 21 July 2021 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of 1632-verse glossary of terminology

The article 1632-verse glossary of terminology has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

The coverage (references, external links, etc.) does not seem sufficient to justify this article passing Wikipedia:General notability guideline nor the related Wikipedia:Notability (fiction) supplementary essay. WP:BEFORE did not reveal any significant coverage on Gnews, Gbooks or Gscholar. If you disagree and deprod this, please explain how it meets them on the talk page here in the form of "This article meets criteria A and B because..." and ping me back through WP:ECHO or by leaving a note at User talk:Piotrus. Thank you.

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. _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 08:05, 19 August 2022 (UTC)