User talk:Mrzubrow

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Welcome!

Hello, Mrzubrow, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few 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 need help, check out Wikipedia:Where to ask a question, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Again, welcome!  SeanMD80talk | contribs 19:16, 6 January 2007 (UTC)

Contents

[edit] Barry L. Zubrow

Some of the people, places or things you have written about in the article Barry L. Zubrow may not be sufficiently well-known to merit articles of their own. The Wikipedia community welcomes newcomers. On Wikipedia, all users are entitled to a user page in which they can describe themselves, and this article's content may be incorporated into that page. However, to merit inclusion in the encyclopedia proper, a subject must be notable, with reference to reliable published sources. We encourage you to write or improve articles on notable subjects. -- Merope 21:11, 4 March 2007 (UTC)

Wikipedia is not a place to write about yourself. Please do not resubmit this article. -- Merope 21:14, 4 March 2007 (UTC)
Wikipedia is an encyclopedia; all of its articles must be on notable subjects. I don't see any evidence that your relative meets our notability standards. Furthermore, your writing this article represents a conflict of interest, which threatens our ability to maintain a neutral point of view. -- Merope 21:20, 4 March 2007 (UTC)
Well, I'm an administrator, which means that the community has decided that I have a good knowledge of policy and can be trusted to use the tools correctly. However, if you disagree with my decision (as is certainly your right), you may request a deletion review. -- Merope 21:27, 4 March 2007 (UTC)
The notability standards Wikipedia uses for people are at WP:BIO. -- Merope 21:32, 4 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Wikipedia:Deletion_review/Log/2007_March_4#Barry_L._Zubrow

I've helped fix your deletion review request, but you did not leave a reason for why the article should be undeleted. Please edit it as soon as possible. -- Merope 22:12, 4 March 2007 (UTC)

I have commented at your AfD page linked above, so you will want to check it again, regularly, and put it on your watchlist if it isn't already. Feel free to thank me at my talk page. SeanMD80talk | contribs 22:24, 5 March 2007 (UTC)

It's alright Mrzubrow, you don't need to apologize, you were bold. Don't let this stop you from editing Wikipedia in the future. Remember to always sign your name on talk pages with four tildes, like this:~~~~. SeanMD80talk | contribs 18:58, 18 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Deletion of the Request Entry

Yes. If you would like to discuss the deletion of the request, you can talk to User:DMG413, he/she deleted it. And please, sign all of your messages with four tildes (~~~~). You can type a tilde by pressing Shift+the button to the left of your #1/! button on the top left of your keyboard. SeanMD80talk | contribs 17:17, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

I don't really think it's a question of whether he has the "right" to delete your request, I think its a question of if it was right to request a repost of your deleted article. I must confess that once you requested its repost, I posted a note on the request saying that it was previously deleted, and that if one wanted to repost it they should have a look at the argument and vote first. He probably thought it was stupid to repost, and deleted the request. If you want to protest, be my guest and talk to him/her; don't expect an answer you want. SeanMD80talk | contribs 23:59, 20 March 2007 (UTC)
I think you really should get over this, Matt. You have been working on this for over three weeks and it's obviously not going to happen. Why don't you just move on from trying to find another way to write a Barry Zubrow article, and find something else to write about, like Pingry. It's just recently been tagged as looking like an advertisment. Why don't you fix that instead? SeanMD80talk | contribs 00:13, 21 March 2007 (UTC)

Alright, Matt, if you insist on pursuing this, then here's my advice:

  • Since you made some good points in your discussion, why don't you just go into the history (of the request page), find the text of what you wrote, copy it and paste into the current page (basically re-list your request).
  • Go to an administrator (one who was not involved with the deletion) to help mediate your problem (if you cannot get what you want from the user who deleted it). Some excellent admins from my personal experience are User:Academic Challenger, User:Cyde, and User:Nightstallion. SeanMD80talk | contribs 16:33, 21 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Deletion

I would suggest that you take a look at the ownership of articles policy. Any user can edit (including adding to, altering or deleting) anything within an article or elsewhere in the site assuming it doesn't violate other policies. Admins have the added ability to delete entire articles when needed. As far as why I deleted the request, the AfD vote reached a consensus to delete recently, and as it appeared that there was no changes in the circumstances as to why the article was deleted, a new article would be a repost and would be deleted under the speedy deletion policy for such material. As such, the request appeared to be needless and cluttering up the page. --DMG413 01:34, 22 March 2007 (UTC)

  • In the AfD vote, it appears that the article was deleted primarily due to a consensus around a lack of notability - every single voter cited that issue other than the initial listng - and not the COI issue as you asserted. And as far as I can see, there has been no change in the notability situation since the vote was closed. --DMG413 17:51, 25 March 2007 (UTC)
    • I cannot find any suggestions that the subject is sufficiently notable other than what you've said and a single suggestion to that end in the deletion review - versus the consensus found around a lack of notability in the AfD vote. If that's wrong, you'll have to point me to where you see that. And as far as your claim that the article is linked to in multiple articles, the only link I can find is a single link in the Haverford College article that an anon added. --DMG413 01:44, 26 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Minor Edits

Hello again.

I just would like to remind you that when you edit an article in a minor way, such as rewording a sentence or correcting spelling or grammar, you should mark the box saying "This is a minor edit." Pretty much anything besides these examples should not be marked as minor. When correcting spelling or grammar on a large scale in an article, do not mark the edit as minor. Same goes for rewording. Happy vernal equinox. SeanMD80talk | contribs 02:17, 22 March 2007 (UTC)

I know my tips are probably getting very annoying, but here's another miscellaneous tip: You should probably create a user page. It doesn't have to be big or fancy, but other users will trust you (not YOU, but anyone) alot less if they see a redlink as your signature than if it is a bluelink. Seeing a redlink as your name just shouts out to users that your a "newbie". This is no judgement about, you but just a suggestion. SeanMD80talk | contribs 16:52, 25 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Response from Academic Challenger

Hello, I got your message. As DMG said, the AFD voters decided to delete the article primarily because they thought this person is not notable. And the AFD occurred after the Deletion Review, so the deletion Review is no longer very relevant. I'm going to have to suggest that you abandon your attempt to create this article. Maybe in a year or so, if he becomes more notable, you can request it again. Academic Challenger 21:36, 25 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Image copyright problem with Image:Learjet_40.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Learjet_40.jpg. The image has been identified as not specifying the copyright status of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. If you don't indicate the copyright status of the image on the image's description page, using an appropriate copyright tag, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided copyright information for them as well.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 07:22, 30 March 2007 (UTC)