Talk:Susan Boyle: Difference between revisions

Content deleted Content added

Inline

Revision as of 18:25, 13 April 2009

Could somebody add that Perez Hilton has posted the video on his american gossip site ttp://perezhilton.com/2009-04-12-susan-boyle

Digg & Reddit

Last I checked digg and reddit are user controlled sites. The contents or implication of anything on those sites doesn't meet WP:V and nothing can be sourced from them. There have been plenty of talk regarding the veracity of some of the submissions and how they become "popular" depending on who submits them, etc. There is no indication that the results of a digg submission are notable or reliable and constitute original research.--221.138.100.194 (talk)

14:26, 13 April 2009 (UTC)

How is referencing digg & reddit original research? I didn't submit them, I didn't even create this article. You make little to no sense here. R3ap3R.inc (talk) 16:36, 13 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Piers

Is Piers Morgan judging America's Got Talent as well as Britain's Got Talent? 96.242.5.155 (talk) 17:22, 13 April 2009 (UTC)iiDecember[reply]

Generalizations as motive for deletion

Why is there a notice for deletion on this page, when only part of it could be considered controversial? The first part of the page is purely fact, and most of it is very much verifiable by just looking up iTV's archives. Sounds like a classic case of generalization. Also, there is an under construction notice on the page which explicitly mentions "Please consider not tagging with a deletion tag unless the page has not been edited in several days or the page has no content at all."

IMO there is more than sufficient reason to remove the deletion tag.Pe1pbu (talk) 18:25, 13 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Revision as of 18:24, 13 April 2009 edit Pe1pbu (talk \| contribs) 96 edits No edit summary ← Previous edit		Revision as of 18:25, 13 April 2009 edit undo Pe1pbu (talk \| contribs) 96 edits No edit summary Next edit →
Line 16:		Line 16:
	Why is there a notice for deletion on this page, when only part of it could be considered controversial? The first part of the page is purely fact, and most of it is very much verifiable by just looking up iTV's archives. Sounds like a classic case of generalization. Also, there is an under construction notice on the page which explicitly mentions "Please consider not tagging with a deletion tag unless the page has not been edited in several days or the page has no content at all."		Why is there a notice for deletion on this page, when only part of it could be considered controversial? The first part of the page is purely fact, and most of it is very much verifiable by just looking up iTV's archives. Sounds like a classic case of generalization. Also, there is an under construction notice on the page which explicitly mentions "Please consider not tagging with a deletion tag unless the page has not been edited in several days or the page has no content at all."

	IMO there is more than sufficient reason to remove the deletion tag.		IMO there is more than sufficient reason to remove the deletion tag.[[User:Pe1pbu\|Pe1pbu]] ([[User talk:Pe1pbu\|talk]]) 18:25, 13 April 2009 (UTC)