User talk:Certifried

Welcome!

Hello, Certifried, 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 messages on discussion pages using four tildes ( ~ ); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question on this page and then place  before the question. Again, welcome!
 * The five pillars of Wikipedia
 * Tutorial
 * How to edit a page and How to develop articles
 * How to create your first article (using the Article Wizard if you wish)
 * Manual of Style

December 2011
Thanks for your updates to SmarTrip! Much appreciated. -epicAdam(talk) 16:12, 21 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Glad to help. My 1st wiki edit, yay. Hope I didn't screw anything up! Certifried (talk) 21:34, 21 December 2011 (UTC)

A cup of coffee for you!
Thanks for the kind note. Suggesting deletion may have been premature, it read as though she had created it herself. Looking back through the edits and creation, I see you created it and it appeared to be very neutral. Over time, someone has added quite a few uncited comments which read more like an autobiography. The tone has turned decidedly in to something that is not neutral. I don't really know how to contest those things, but that page needs some clean up. Certifried (talk) 14:40, 18 February 2015 (UTC)

In addition, the links to the books she has written seem to direct to personal pages, which seem to be more advertisement of her own work Certifried (talk) 14:44, 18 February 2015 (UTC)
 * Yes, I created the article, so I have a bias for keeping it. I also am not keen on the direction that the article has taken because it seems less neutral now to me. In this case, I thought that I did not want to engage new users in reaching consensus because I thought it might be difficult to explain Wikipedia especially when this might be the center of activist attention. I like that you added problem templates to the article but beyond leaving warnings there, I personally do not want to do more at this time just because it seems like it might be tense here, and because I think eventually someone else might want to address the issues.
 * The book links can go either way. There is an external links policy which says that there should be one link back to any official page, but more might be promotional. I have no opinion about what should be there.
 * In creating the article I wanted to document the person in a respectful way and right now I do not think I can be further involved without risking controversy, so I think that I mostly want to step away so long as the article is not deleted outright. In my opinion, the biography passes WP:GNG, which is Wikipedia's standard criteria for deciding what gets an article, and it passes because the person has been covered by multiple news agencies on multiple occasions. I wish everyone involved the best and that they get respectful treatment for their views, and that everyone can find reconciliation of ideas. Thanks for being bold on Wikipedia. You did everything right, including your proposal for deletion. If you want to propose again the next step is WP:AfD, which you are welcome to propose. This would call for opinions from at least 5 other people, and it could be the case that people say that this article should be deleted.  Blue Rasberry   (talk)  16:47, 18 February 2015 (UTC)