User talk:Aisha285

Welcome!

Hello,, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful: 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 Questions, ask me on my talk page, or place  on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Again, welcome! Eron 14:56, 29 November 2006 (UTC)
 * The five pillars of Wikipedia
 * How to edit a page
 * Help pages
 * Tutorial
 * How to write a great article
 * Manual of Style

Depletist
Thank you for experimenting with Wikipedia. Your test worked, and the page that you created has been or soon will be deleted. Please use the sandbox for any other tests you want to do. Take a look at the welcome page if you would like to learn more about contributing to our encyclopedia. Eron 14:56, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

As you have contested the speedy deletion of this page, and added some context, I've removed the speedy delete listing. I still have concerns that this is not encyclopedic content, so I have listed the page as an article for deletion. See the article's talk page and it's deletion page for more information. - Eron


 * Your mission, as stated on your user page, makes it clear you are not suited to be an editor here unless you can separate yourself from your mission while editing here. &mdash; Arthur Rubin |  (talk) 03:33, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

Sock puppetry
Aisha285, please be aware that sock puppetry - that is, creating and using multiple accounts in order to influence the result of a vote - violates Wikipedia policy. There is ample circumstantial evidence in the AfD vote located at Articles for deletion/Depletist (second nomination) to suggest that you are creating multiple accounts to influence the result of that vote. If you have, in fact, done this, please revisit the AfD page to indicate which comments are your own posted under those multiple accounts. Thank you. -- Dachannien TalkContrib 18:15, 1 December 2006 (UTC)
 * I've read your reply on Articles for deletion/Depletist (second nomination), and if it is true that you didn't create those additional accounts (the ones noted as being made by accounts which had posted few, if any, comments before), then I apologize. However, you should keep in mind that when Wikipedia editors see brand new accounts being used to post to an AfD, it strongly suggests that someone already involved in the AfD debate is attempting to beef up their side of the debate by creating multiple accounts (aka sock puppets).
 * Since those accounts were created solely for the purpose of commenting in the AfD debate, and by your own admission you are here specifically to promote the use of that word, I believe it is reasonable to think that one of two things is true: that you personally created those accounts as sock puppets, or that several people from your class at OCAD got together and decided to visit Wikipedia solely for participation in that debate.  Both of these are mentioned on the sock puppet policy page as being against Wikipedia's rules.
 * Finally, regarding the debate topic itself: Wikipedia is neither a crystal ball nor a soapbox.  It's not here to promote certain ideas, but rather to provide information on ideas that have already achieved notability.  What I'm saying is, as long as you feel the need to promote the use of the word "depletist", it means that the word still isn't ripe for an article.  If and when it has been accepted by the broader community, and becomes a commonly used term in the environmental debate, maybe it will be time to revisit whether Wikipedia should have an article on it or not.  Until then, there's an entire Internet available for you to share your opinions with others.  -- Dachannien TalkContrib 13:26, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

Contributing to Wikipedia
Looking over the discussion on the deletion of Depletist, I can see that you got a bit of a rough ride there from some editors. As I am the one who put it up for deletion in the first place, I can't help feeling a bit responsible. I don't apologize for the deletion - I think it was clearly warranted by Wikipedia policies on what is and is not encyclopedic - but I do apologize that some people may have felt it necessary to question you as a good faith contributor to the encyclopedia, rather than limiting their comments to the article in question.

I'm also going to respectfully disagree with the editor above who suggests that your commitment to a cause makes you unsuitable as an editor. I believe that there are a great many editors here who feel very strongly about subjects, and who make valuable contributions to articles on those subjects. All that is required is that those contributions meet guidelines on what is encyclopedic (and what is not), notability, neutrality, and verifiability. There are a number of policies and guidelines that can help editors ensure they make appropriate contributions.

I'll use my own experience as an example. I have a personal interest in sport for athletes with a disability, and I am heavily involved as a volunteer in the Paralympic movement. These sports are not particularly well known, so one of my goals here is to expand their coverage. My personal knowledge of these sports, and passion for them, is a great help to me in this. I have used it to create and expand articles on these subjects. However, I still have to follow the rules. There is a lot I know about the subject that I cannot put into articles because I don't have references; it is knowledge gained by personal experience and would be rejected as original research. (Of course, knowing something makes it much easier for me to find appropriate references.) I also can't create articles - even on interesting subjects that I think people should know about - unless the subject is notable. I can think of fifteen or twenty Paralympic athletes who would be fascinating subjects for articles; unfortunately, until they become publicly known, any article I created on them would be quite properly deleted as non-notable.

Your interests seem to be in issues surrounding the environment and sustainable development. I have no doubt that there are many articles on these topics that could benefit from your contributions. There may be notable organizations or people in the environmental movement that do not have articles, or whose articles need development. If you look around, I'm sure you will find a lot of areas you can contribute. As long as your contributions follow Wikipedia guidelines, your passion for the subject doesn't disqualify you from contributing.

I hope that your initial experience here hasn't turned you off completely. I think you probably have a lot to contribute. If you have any questions or need some advice, feel free to ask me or any other editor. Good luck, and happy editing. - Eron Talk 15:49, 5 December 2006 (UTC)