User talk:Allisoncornish

Proposed deletion of Scott Pompe


The article Scott Pompe has been proposed for deletion&#32; because of the following concern:
 * Subject does not meet the notability guidelines for inclusion; article appears to have been created solely to document non-notable litigation.

While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. § FreeRangeFrog croak 21:13, 27 February 2013 (UTC)

Journatic
Regarding your AFD: All of my edits are sourced by 24+ different reputable newspapers including The Chicago Tribune, The Chicago Sun Times, Crain's Chicago Business, Poynter, NPR, The Guardian, The Chicago Reader, and more. Nothing I have stated is unsourced or with an “Axe to grind”. If you find the article to be “negative,” then please suggest changes. Unfortunately, the things that Journatic has done are public record (as recorded by many leading, unbiased newspapers that were my sources). If you can identify statements that are not sourced and are an “attack” then please do. I carefully read through these articles and took exactly what was presented in them. It is simply a (cited) fact that Journatic used false bylines (of American names for authors who were Filipino), plagiarized, and fabricated content. They attempted to cover this up when it first came out (also sourced) and the CEO’s decisions / behavior are all documented in reputable places outside Wikipedia. They then lost business due to this and other reasons presented in the article (and sourced). If you are writing about events that are not happy and great, then the article might look biased and like an “attack” - but the prior version was simply Journatic’s promotional material pasted in here (citing only “The Journatic Journal”) Now, I have cited 24 additional newspapers and given the full story, which is not always pretty - but it is factual. — Preceding unsigned comment added by ApolloLee (talk • contribs) 23:09, 17 May 2013 (UTC)

Nomination of Scott Pompe for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Scott Pompe is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Articles for deletion/Scott Pompe until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion template from the top of the article. § FreeRangeFrog croak 15:52, 28 February 2013 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Gellman v. Tribune Company‎


The article Gellman v. Tribune Company‎ has been proposed for deletion. The proposed deletion notice added to the article should explain why.

While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. 76.189.111.199 (talk) 01:22, 2 March 2013 (UTC)