User talk:Aerlindflynn

Welcome!

Hello, Aerlindflynn, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Unfortunately, one or more of the pages you created, such as OlsenDaines, may not conform to some of Wikipedia's guidelines, and may soon be deleted.

There's a page about creating articles you may want to read called Your first article. If you are stuck, and looking for help, please come to the New contributors' help page, where experienced Wikipedians can answer any queries you have! Or, you can just type helpme on this page, and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Here are a few other 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 have any questions, check out Questions or ask me on my talk page. Again, welcome!  ttonyb (talk) 22:48, 19 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Starting an article
 * Your first article
 * Biographies of living persons
 * How to write a great article
 * The five pillars of Wikipedia
 * Help pages
 * Tutorial

Speedy deletion nomination of OlsenDaines


A tag has been placed on OlsenDaines 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 an organization or company, 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.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, contest the deletion by clicking on the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion," which appears inside of the speedy deletion tag (if no such tag exists, the page is no longer a speedy delete candidate). Doing so will take you to the talk page where you will find a pre-formatted place for you to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. You can also visit the the page's talk page directly to give your reasons, 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. If the page is deleted, you can contact one of these administrators to request that the administrator userfy the page or email a copy to you.  ttonyb (talk) 22:48, 19 May 2011 (UTC)

Notability
There probably are other law firms the same size or even smaller. Please see WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS. Merely existing isn't a justification for having an article. Conversely, not having an article doesn't mean you're not doing a good job. (Some people and firms wish they didn't have articles - I remember one case where an article was about to be deleted against the protests of the subject, until some very interesting info turned up. The subject's side then did all they could to get it deleted. It's still up...) Remember that this is an encyclopaedia, not a directory that anyone can be in, or a Top 40 list where jiggery pokery with figures can inflate status. Read WP:GNG for general notability, and WP:RS for the sort of sources that are needed to prove the notability. Peridon (talk) 13:56, 20 May 2011 (UTC)
 * If the article goes, you can always ask an admin to userfy a copy for you. (Possibly not me, as I'm in one of those here and there phases, and there doesn't always have net access.) Peridon (talk) 21:00, 20 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Thank you for your help and feedback. It is really and truly appreciated.  The here and there phases dominate much of my life, so I know how much effort effort can be during these time.  I'm working on the attorneys who have the most encyclopedic worthy practices to give me their citations - merely existing is not enough reason for an article, I agree.  I'm a big Wikipedia addict, and my intentions are not to clutter or detract from its usefulness.  While definitely not as intriguing as the Dyatlov Pass incident article - this firm has enough involvement in issues that affect the working poor to make it notable and article worthy.    Aerlindflynn (talk) 1:39, 21 May 2011 (UTC)