Talk:Julian Segura Camacho

Untitled
A vanity article by a self-published author. Much like his books, this "article" lacks coherent editing and verifiable information. 70.115.171.56 (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 04:52, 27 January 2014 (UTC)

Recent edits
I have recently edited this article to Wikipedia standards. Specifically, WP rules are clear that any uncited material may be removed without any further justification. This has fixed most of the problems with the article, at the expense of reducing its length by 90%. Given the nature of the text I was (sadly) forced to delete, I strongly suspect this article was written by its subject. Mr Camacho, if you read this, please be aware that it is considered very bad form to edit your own biographical article (let alone create one!), and to fill it with original research and opinions regarding your own work is completely verboten. Unless you can find independent secondary sources for the information you'd like to see in this article -- in which case, although still a bit on the vain side, it is nonetheless viewed as legitimate contribution. If you are not clear on this, please review the basic requirements for inclusion in Wikipedia. Also, please be aware that (imho) your article barely passes the requirements of WP:NOTABILITY, and could easily be considered a candidate for deletion. If you attempt to re-insert un-cited material, I will likely be inclined to nominate this article for deletion, on the grounds of WP:VANITY, or the afore-noted notability guidelines. Please understand that this is an entirely impersonal action; personally, I like what this article had to say about the unique experience of pre-American Mexicans in America (I have known a few). It was not a pleasant thing for me, to press delete on all that lovely text. But Wikpedia can be a harsh mistress, indeed. Additionally, I'd like to add that, if I'm wrong about the author of this text, I certainly mean to cast no aspersions against anyone. Again, just doing what WP editors do, while trying to be kind enough to offer a thorough (indeed, absurdly excessive) explanation. Whoever wrote this article, please do find reliable sources and re-build it, if you can. Eaglizard (talk) 21:55, 24 November 2014 (UTC)