Talk:Jules Kroll

Work in progress
This is an article in progress.

Speedy deletion nomination of Jules B. Kroll
A tag has been placed on Jules B. Kroll 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 or group of people, 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, as well as our subject-specific notability guideline for biographies. You may also wish to consider using a Wizard to help you create articles - see the Article Wizard.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding  to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, 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. Lastly, please note that if the page does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that they userfy the page or have a copy emailed to you. &lt;&gt;Multi-Xfer&lt;&gt; (talk) 03:11, 15 September 2009 (UTC)


 * Please don't remove speedy deletion templates from pages you have created. &lt;&gt;Multi-Xfer&lt;&gt; (talk) 03:13, 15 September 2009 (UTC)

Okay. I thought it was just a formality on works in progress. I didn't dream that you suggested speedily deletion of all articles in progress as an automatic response and general policy. I had been editing it for under two minutes when the speedy deletion tab came along.Nunamiut (talk) 03:16, 15 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Articles have to indicate why the subject is notable, evne if it is "in progress". If you patrolled newpages like I do you'd be surprised by the sheer number of articles that pop every minute that have basically no content and never will. The reason a credible claim of notability is required is because not everyone will automatically know the person, place or thing you're creating an article about. One thing that you may find helpful: start articles in a subpage of your own userspace and when you are satisfied that they make a claim of notability and are referenced, move or copy and paste into a new article on the live site. This way, you can work in peace without having to contend with possible speedy deletion. Cheers! &lt;&gt;Multi-Xfer&lt;&gt; (talk) 05:37, 15 September 2009 (UTC)

How do you indicate why the subject is notable?

note
It was pretended that we were not allowed to use any of the statistical data that was included on a few other pages so I no longer know how to include any data on people living or dead. Some wiki admin just shows up deleting pure data. I am not about to waste my time adding such data only to have it removed by an admin.

admins on these topics seem to think that using power is more important than informing the public. its a thouroghly juvenile and dishonest practice and I do not intend to stop deploring it until it subsists or until adult admins take action towards such practices.

In response to: "If CorenSearchBot is in error: Simply note so on this article's discussion page."

the article currently contains scentences and paragraphs with syntax like:

"Mr. Kroll received a B.A. degree from Cornell University in 1963 and an LL.B degree from Georgetown University Law Center in 1966." We need to be able to quote or paraphrase on our informal userpages without being edited by BOTS.

that the corenbot was in error was noted on the page but the bot or some admin still removed the page.

These cannot be seen as "copyrighted" since they are mere statements and lists of facts. I will not bother to rewrite them or the syntax until someone documents an absolute urgent and legitimate need to do so.Nunamiut (talk) 07:59, 15 April 2009 (UTC)

and If the fair use legal statement defends anything at all it must be entries such as this one. Nunamiut (talk) 02:55, 15 September 2009 (UTC)
 * The rules are the rules. Follow them or you will likely be blocked indefinitely. Wikipedia cannot accept copyrighted text. Even if we did, plagiarism isn't particularly professional. &lt;&gt;Multi-Xfer&lt;&gt; (talk) 02:57, 15 September 2009 (UTC)

Pff! It (the article) contained his date of birth and where he went to school and thats in there now isn't it? Go ahead delete the article again. Who cares? Kroll is the head of the largest security firm on the planet so I'll bet thats an easily justified delete among wiki admins given the current level of honesty thats been displayed lately on controversial issues. But please. Stop lording over other adults. And dont try to school me or others on copyright law or the use of fair use in law. Are you seriously pretending anyone can uphold or claim "copyright" to the syntax in a sentence like: "nn was born 1901, and died in in 1977". Or that we should do our utmost not to "plagiarize" that kind of syntax?? when is it time to chuck out intellectual dishonesty? directions and even rules are fine. but It's not forbidden to use one's mental abilities to see when they are applicable and when they are not either. "Go figure" actually works as an imperative as well as a question here. comment added by Nunamiut (talk) 16:02, 6 February 2010 (UTC) original comment posted: 05:51, 8 October 2009 (UTC)